Power and the diffusion of management ideas: The case of McKinsey & Co

Abstract

In studies of the diffusion or translation of management ideas, power is frequently implied but is rarely theorised explicitly. Moreover, when it is recognised, the focus is often on only one form of power. This can obscure how different forms of power relate to each other, shape idea diffusion and connect to different forms of resistance. Using Lukes’ classic framing of power, we explore the activities of a key agent in the diffusion of ideas – management consultancy – and one of the leading players in that field – McKinsey & Co. We draw on diverse, publicly available forms of data on three different management ideas to identify how different forms of power and resistance enable and constrain the diffusion of management ideas. Our study emphasises both the dynamic relations between different forms of power over time and the importance of acknowledging the unintended consequences of power. At the same time, by focusing on power dynamics mostly operating outside of consulting projects, we add to our understanding of the role of consultancy in the diffusion of management ideas more generally.

Lean thinking: outside-in, bottom-up? The paradox of contemporary soft lean and consultant-driven lean implementation

“…The business model of GC follows that of most global consultancies: selling a high volume of services, using a large group of newly educated students from elite schools; using more experienced consultants to sell projects to top-level managers and support these juniors (Alvesson, 2012;O'Mahoney & Sturdy, 2015), who have excellent formal skills and technical competence, but less experience and source credibility in meeting with clients (Ko, Kirsch, & King, 2005). A premise for the role of adding value in a client organisation is that consultants' contributions can be decontextualised -from a rational perspective, management concepts are context-freebut this does not correspond with contemporary lean, which emphasises local contingencies and adaption (Hines et al, 2004).…”

Because you're worth it? Determinants of Vice Chancellor pay in the UK

“…However, Holmström and Milgrom (1991) argue that multiple criteria, with some targets easier to meet than others, could have detrimental effects on the principal's welfare and augmented measurement costs. More specifically, the proliferation of targets in UK HE reflects the influence of consultants within the policy community that is highly problematic (see O'Mahoney and Sturdy, 2016). However, the extent to which targets are constantly shifting would suggest that maintaining consistent goals is inimical to the short-termist culture permeating both business and government.…”

Common Threats and Managing Reputation in Executive Search Firms

“…We find evidence of this through firms emphasizing symbolic capital, which was used as a persuasive tool to signal particular elite qualities (Bourdieu, 1990;Kipping, 2011) to clients and to influence the behaviour of their staff to reinforce this high status, which enabled firms to justify charging premium prices to clients (e.g. This is particularly important in the context of PSFs, where professionals play an important relational role with clients and candidates (O'Mahoney and Sturdy, 2016). This is particularly important in the context of PSFs, where professionals play an important relational role with clients and candidates (O'Mahoney and Sturdy, 2016).…”