A categorisation of dialectics in response to project uncertainty

Abstract

PurposeScholars are increasingly acknowledging the importance of conversations in the management of complex projects. Defining dialectics as “the art of purposeful conversation”, this paper aims to rationalise the somewhat disorganised field of dialectics by developing a categoreal scheme.Design/methodology/approachThe authors refer to the current state of research into the conversational aspects of complex projects, and examine the historical development of, and philosophical and scholarly commentary on, the dialectical method.FindingsThe categories the authors propose are the Socratic, Conversational, Fichtean and Peircean. They differ in relation to the subject matter of the dialectic; their vulnerability to environmental influences; the degree of structure they require for optimal performance; and the situations in which they might most profitably be applied.Research limitations/implicationsA single categoreal scheme is rarely the last word, and the authors invite other scholars to explore the field in a similar way.Practical implicationsThe scheme proposed here is intended to enhance the project manager's approach to conversations, by referring to the specific virtues and limitations of each of the categories.Social implicationsThe informed use of dialectics may help to ameliorate the significant damage done to organisations and economies around the world by failed and underperforming projects.Originality/valueThe authors present the first categorisation of the field, with the aim of equipping the practitioner to think about dialectical approaches in a more systematic way.