A Rhetorical Theory of Diffusion

Abstract

I use rhetorical theory to reconceptualize the diffusion of managerial practices. Specifically, I argue that the diffusion of a practice depends on the discursive justifications used to rationalize it. When such justifications are accepted and taken for granted, a practice reaches a state of institutionalization. Furthermore, I propose that changes in justifications and diffusion provide a basis for explaining institutionalization as both a process and a state. I then develop several propositions from this model.The management field has witnessed the rise and fall of many managerial practices, including sensitivity training, quality circles, and reengineering (Carson, Lanier, Carson, & Guidry, 2000;Eccles, Nohria, & Berkley, 1992). Most management innovations arrive and dissipate quickly (Abrahamson & Fairchild, 1999), while a few thrive and diffuse broadly throughout the business community. Although several theories explain variation in the diffusion of managerial practices (Abrahamson, 1991;O'Neill, Pouder, & Buchholtz, 1998;Rogers, 1995), critics argue that these explanations often emphasize realist concerns at the expense of linguistic considerations (Hirsch, 1986;Strang & Meyer, 1994). Therefore, in this article I use neoinstitutional theory, because it emphasizes the role of language or discourse in the diffusion process (Strang & Meyer, 1994).Proponents of the neoinstitutional perspective view the spread of managerial practices as a salient organizational act that must make sense to decision makers and must satisfy the institutional environment (Scott, 1995;Tolbert & Zucker, 1996). Managerial practices are accompanied by legitimating managerial discourse, which explains how practices help managers rationally pursue valued goals (Friedland & Alford, 1991;Strang & Meyer, 1994). For example, the management fashion variant of neoinstitutionalism (Abrahamson, 1996;Abrahamson & Fairchild, 1999;Kieser, 1997) describes how managers use discourse to communicate to organizational stakeholders that the adoption of a given practice complies with norms of rationality and norms of progress (Abrahamson, 1996;Abrahamson & Fairchild, 1999). Thus, discourse shapes decisions about the adoption and wider diffusion of managerial practices (Abrahamson & Fairchild, 1999;Strang & Meyer, 1994).Although neoinstitutional theory includes a role for discourse, two key problems remain. First, it suggests a model of diffusion that is inherently adaptivist (Hasselbladh & Kallinikos, 2000). It shifts rational adaptation from the need to acquire resources in the technoeconomic environment to the need to conform normatively to the social environment (Hasselbladh & Kallinikos, 2000;Hasselbladh & Theodoridis, 1997), and it fails to explain why those needs exist or become influential or why a particular structure fulfills the need in question (Perrow, 1993). Second, neoinstitutional theory focuses on how institutions constrain actors at the expense of explaining how actors create institutions (Barley & Tolbert, 1997;Zucker, 1987). Culture and...

Modelling the impact of ISO 14001 on environmental performance: A comparative approach

“…According to this rather critical view, ISO 14001 certification is primarily a response to external pressures aimed at re-aligning the organization with social expectations. Its rapid dissemination is explained by a trend phenomenon (Abrahamson, 1991;Green, 2004), not by its intrinsic efficiency. In fact, integration of this management system remains relatively superficial and representative of a "myth and ceremony" serving to strengthen the organization's social legitimacy (DiMaggio and Powell, 1983;Meyer and Rowan, 1977).…”

“…These ethical aspects encourage rhetoric of rationalization based on discourses and adhesion to idealized values which are removed from the reality and efficiency of practices. Indeed, as shown by Green (2004), the dissemination of management practices resides mainly in the legitimacy of the rhetoric accompanying the adoption of these practices. These rhetorical aspects depend much more on the beliefs and rational justifications advanced by management than on the intrinsic value of the management techniques adopted.…”

The Role of Analogy in the Institutionalization of Sustainability Reporting

“…At the most basic level entrepreneurs must produce texts that are accessible, understandable and persuasive (Green 2004;Phillips et al 2004;Suddaby and Greenwood 2005). Rhetorical strategies are also likely to be used extensively, to enhance suasion and influence by appealing to logic, ethics and emotion (Green 2004;Suddaby and Greenwood 2005).…”

“…In this work it is essential to "balance the need for legitimacy by abiding by societal norms about what is appropriate with efforts to create unique identities that may differentiate and lend competitive advantage" (Lounsbury and Glynn 2001: 559). Previous research has amply documented how adroit institutional entrepreneurs craft their project to fit the conditions of the field (Maguire, Hardy and Lawrence 2004), often employing discursive strategies (Green 2004;Phillips, Lawrence and Hardy 2004;Suddaby and Greenwood 2005) including the use of analogies to existing institutionalized practices (Hargadon and Douglas 2001;Leblebici et al 1991). These studies imply that institutional entrepreneurship is more likely to succeed when the entrepreneur is cognizant of field-level politics and is skilled enough to craft a compelling message advocating for change.…”

Marking Their Own Homework: The Pragmatic and Moral Legitimacy of Industry Self-Regulation

“…Through interacting within the scheme, managers are made more aware of social needs and information spreads more quickly (Marquis et al 2007). Focusing on the rhetoric of ISR, critical theorists also ask how managers learn to talk about social issues and solutions (Green 2004). Even weak ISR can serve as ''aspirational talk'', and the beginnings of a learning process (Christensen et al 2013), offering the possibility of aligning interests and gaining pragmatic legitimacy over time.…”