000			02077pab a2200169 454500
008			180718b2001 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
100			_aWalgenbach, Peter
245			_aWhat can an apple learn from an orange? or what do companies use benchmaking for
260			_c2001
300			_ap.121-44
362			_aFeb
520			_aThe inflation of new management concepts in recent years has triggered a discussion that these concepts should be seen as `management fashions'. Often linked to this perspective is the notion that these concepts are used as rhetorical means to legitimize the organization, and that they remain decoupled from work activities. Subsequently, empirical studies focus on the diffusion of a new management concept or the intensity with which a new concept is discussed in the literature. A systematic analysis of the contents and the conceptual elements of the new concepts, and a systematic comparison of old and new approaches are rarely undertaken. To avoid a lop-sided view of new management concepts, we argue that the discussion of `management fashions' requires an analysis of the core ideas underlying a new concept as well as systematic comparisons of old and newer approaches. Benchmarking (BM) as a new `management fashion' is used as an example to show what such an analysis could look like. An explanation for the upswing of BM will be presented, wherein BM is seen as a continuation of Taylor's concept of scientific management. An analysis of the core elements of BM shows why it is an attractive instrument for management. However, this analysis does not entirely explain the increasing spread of the concept. It is not clear as to what motivates the industry's best to offer themselves as a benchmark for others, and further explanation for this will be given. From a managerial perspective, BM is a method for emulating price and quality competition, as well as increasing employee motivation and performance. - Reproduced
650			_aManagement
700			_aHegele, Cornelia
773			_aOrganization
909			_a47777
999			_c47777 _d47777