The Three Organization Theory Perspectives - Article Example

Running Header: Organizational Theory Perspective Organizational Theory 9 May 2009 Compare and Contrast the three organization theory perspectives The aim of organizational theory is to understand the internal working, formal structure and external environment of complex behavior depicted by humans within organizations. Organization theory has gone through transmutation over the past few years bringing into consideration three specific perspectives: modernism, interpretivism and postmodernism. In fact, Albrow (1997) states that, “Each attempt to set out the principles of organization as a coherent rational theory rapidly becomes more than a relic of the changing times” (p. 152). Thus, different organizational theory perspective occurs due to changing times and changing reality. Albrow (1997) regarding the basis of the different perspectives asserts that “postmodern theorizing then ceases to hold the same relation to organizational reality which modern organization theory once had to modern organization, neither foundation, nor mirror” (p. 152). Netting and O’Connor (2008) references the writings of Morgan (1997) in the published book Images of Organization acknowledges that, “that all theories of organization and management are based on implicit images or metaphors that lead us to see, understand, and manage organizations in distinctive yet practical ways” (p. 23). In this case, metaphors are the attempts that are required to understand one element of experience in relation to another. Thus, the assumptions and principles that are embraced by each perspective are varied. The factors that play an important role in the way that the organizational theories are approached and viewed as different are the structures, organizational effectiveness and technological capability. Netting and O’Connor (2008) states that, “each perspective brings with it certain insights and emphasizes particular aspects of organizational life while overlooking other essential elements” (p. 25). This then illustrates the ideologies that are expressed by each perspective. Generally, modernism a perspective that began during the Revolution period brings into focus theories such as those of Weber, Fayol and the likes. Postmodernism tries to maneuver away from this perspective and elaborates the changing requirements of current organizations and tasks that are supposed to be accomplished. Interpretivism mostly deals with organizational culture or communication. Thus, in relation to these three perspectives, what are their ontological and epistemological perspectives? In the case of modernism, objectivism is an important factor while positivism tries to pinpoint the truth. This means that knowledge is tested against an objective world. Thus, organizations within this perspective are driven by norms of efficiency, rationality and effectiveness for specific intentions that are stipulated. Interpretivism utilizes subjective awareness in understanding objective or external existence (Tsoukas & Knudsen, 2003). This brings into consideration interpretivism that view knowledge is something relative to the knower and can be socially constructed. Thus, organizations are continuously constructed and re-constructed through symbolically appreciating mediation between the members. Nevertheless, postmodernism takes a different perspective when dealing with organizations. Its ontological perspective is that of postmodernism - the belief that world appears through language and usually situated in discourse. Thus, knowledge cannot be used to assume that it accurately accounts for the truth due to that fact that meanings are not independent in reality. Hence, from this perspective, organizations are arenas for enacting power, irrationality, oppression and communicative distortion. Thus, it can be manipulated to suite the given situations (Tsoukas & Knudsen, 2003). What are the assumptions underlying the management of organizations from these views Principles and ideologies drive the way that the organizational theory views a given scenario. Each theory comes with certain features that tend to discredit or disapprove the principles of the other theory. Modernism perspective employs the open system theory and organism view on the way that organizations operate. Lewis (2001) states that, “open systems theory brought with it the idea of organic growth and development of organizations, their different levels of activity and the interconnectedness of organization and environment” (p. 86). This aspect was included in the modernism perspective after the perspectives of Weber that championed bureaucracy, Taylor’s theory that sanctioned scientific and management, and Fayol’s theory of rational administration. Lewis (2001) views that both Taylor’s and Fayol’s theories “emphasized on structure, hierarchy and control” (p. 86). Thus, modernism perspective approaches an organization in terms of structure, organizational power or hierarchy, roles, strategy formulation, and authority. McKinlay and Starkey (1988) summarizes that the main concern for the modern theory was based on reason and progress. They differentiate the modernism from postmodernism in that, “In modernist theory, organization is viewed as a social tool and an extension of human rationality, the expression of planned thought and calculative action, while in postmodernism, organization is a defensive reaction to forces…which constantly threaten the stability of organized life” (p. 1). Hence, postmodernism plays a role in the way that organization is viewed and in relation with other organization perspectives. Postmodernism perspective is viewed as been against modernism or contradicting the ideologies and principles of modernism. Albrow (1997) states that, “postmodernity both undermines modernity and brings the very possibility of such a narrative into question” (p. 152). The same aspect is shared by Lynch and Cruise (2006) in that, “the postmodern perspective criticizes all that modernity cherishes: the accumulated experience of Western civilization, industrialization, urbanization, advanced technology and the nation-state” (p. 791). Moreover, postmodernism does not champion ideas such as office, bureaucracy, individual responsibility, detached experiment, career or liberal democracy (Lynch and Cruise, 2006). Nevertheless, postmodernism champions fragmentation, decentralization and relativism. To achieve its goals, postmodernism employs two strategies: discourse and deconstruction. Deconstruction is used for analysis purposes while discourse is encouraged to improve the base of communication. Thus, postmodernism embraces change and believes in flexibility. Another perspective that plays an important role in the way organizations operate is the interpretivism due to the emergence of culture as a widely and viable adopted approach towards understanding organizations (Ashcraft and Mumby, 2003). Heath and Bryant (2000) state that, “Interpretivism sheds light onto the dynamics of organizations by revealing the meaning individual members use to share a culture” (p. 321). Hence, interpretivism sees an organization as narrative, dramatic and symbolic entities. Lewis (2001) shares the same perspective by stating that, “the symbolic-interpretative perspective emphasizes the subjective realities of organizational life and shows how organizations are built from negotiations and understandings of the world” (p. 86). Thus, the underlying principle and assumption when employing interpretivism is the social or cultural aspect in understanding the way and participation towards fulfilling organizational processes. Interpretivism champions ambiguity as the source of creativity and power but also a derivative of confusion and danger. Thus, for interpretivism to achieve its goals it employs two perspectives: critical and analytical strategies. Critical theory aims in discovering aspects of culture that usually stifles human growth through been practical or carrying out their day-to-day activities in effective organizations. The analytical approach tries to pinpoint the meanings of organizational structure of cultures to enable in revealing forces that impinge and guide on individual and the collective efforts on behalf of the given organization (Heath and Bryant, 2000). Thus, communication plays an important role in the way that effective organizations are structured and the way that it fulfills its requirements. How do the perspectives help us to create a range of possibilities for designing and managing organizations? Organizations come with different requirements and strategies towards achieving their relevant goals and aims. The different perspectives come with different varieties of strategies towards developing effective organizations. Modernism is rooted to the ideas of Weber, Taylor, Fayol and open source theory depicting and organization as an organism. Authority, power, structure, division and bureaucracy play an important role in which modernism perspective design and manage organizations (Hatch & Cunliffe, 2006). A different perspective is taken by postmodernism. A postmodern organization can be termed as an organization, which is composed of self-controlled, self-managed, diverse teams that are flexible and are networked to achieve a given goal. Most of the teams that are within this organization are arranged in a horizontal format in which each employee is highly powered and are fully involved in fulfilling the requirements of the job, and there is continuous flow of information throughout the lifeline of the project. Thus, postmodernism embraces diversification and resolves important issues in large industries. The approach understands that the requirements of organization changes at a faster rate that planning and strategizing cannot fully accomplish its requirements. Thus, in the time of changing requirements and diversity in terms of competition and globalization, postmodernism plays a crucial role. However, postmodernism does not address the issue of social and cultural diversity, an aspect that is addressed by the salient interpretivism perspective. The two branches of interpretivism addresses the complications that workers have to undergo when there are within the organization. For example, the critical theory states that organizations should not be de-humanizing thus should champion the use of organizational communication to improve communication between the workers and the management team. Moreover, adequate communication ensures that the power structures that are created by the management liberating the workers. Heath and Bryant (2000) state that, critical interpretivism main aim is to reduce the powers that managers posses, a factor that tends to make them more superior than other employees. The main aim of communication is premises, themes, narratives and metaphors that are maximized by the management in preference of the employees. Thus, proper communication strategies by the management may play an important role on workers turnover. The interpretive approach in fulfilling the requirements of the organization may be through analyzing and utilizing the hierarchical levels that are commonly associated with groups, interpersonal and organization. Interpersonal deals with individuals’ efforts of being efficacious in an organization. Effective groups should have strategies that champion’s communication resulting in breaking any string that prevents the successful implementation of projects thus resulting into the success of the organization. Which Perspective appears to have the most utility from your point of view? The principles and ideologies that underlines each perspective makes its’ relevant perspective to be the most useful one. However, business orientation bringing into play internal and external environment tends to shape the organization to employ one perspective more. Organizations that have to survive during this period of globalization and uncertainty should employ the postmodernism perspective. This is because current organization requirements are to navigate through the turbulent business situation that is filled with unpredictability, requiring short-term survival strategies that are based on visions and values. Hickman (1998) view on the world in relative to postmodernism is, “In the postmodern world, we must look to an inner sense of self and to an outer structure of support and community for shelter, stability, and insight in an edgy and turbulent world” (p. 26). This indicates that at a time that long-term strategies cannot be developed, the appropriate method is ensuring that the workers have the right tools and resources that ensure that they achieve the goals that are set by the organization. Roles and responsibilities accorded to individuals’ within the organization should be adhered to ensuring the object of the strategy is achieved. This can be fulfilled through utilizing the appropriate resource (labor or equipments) in a way that it satisfies the directives and goals that are set. Thus, the use of divisions, departments, power and other constraints as championed by modernism should be abolished a team that is developed should be free from divisions or vesting many powers to the management. Rather postmodernism ensures that there boundaries transparent between the management and the workers, and between workers and workers, and between the managerial levels and in their entity are inter-networked. Lynch and Cruise (2006) “For the public manager, postmodernism says that there are no longer a ‘right’ policy or superior guiding wisdom, no shared assumptions, no appropriate ethical approach to decision making or even criteria appropriate for program evaluation because of the impossibility of modern truth or theory or ethical frameworks other than relative or situational ones” (p. 791). Thus, this statement illustrates the two-facet nature of the postmodern perspective. Postmodern perspective lacks the contribution of social or ethical requirements as stipulated by theories that guide human behavior and way in which duties should be fulfilled. The three different comes with different utilities that tends to improve the position of organization. However, the most appropriate in terms of utility is postmodernism. References Albrow, M. (1997). Do Organizations Have Feelings? London: Taylor & Francis Publishers. Ashcraft, K. & Mumby, D. (2003). Reworking Gender: A Feminist Communicology of Organization. New York: Sage Publishers. Hatch, M. & Cunliffe, A. (2006). Organization Theory: Modern, Symbolic, and Postmodern Perspectives, 2nd Ed. London: Oxford University Press. Hassard, J. & Parker, M. (1993). Postmodernism and Organizations. New York: Sage Publishers. Heath, R. & Bryant, J. (2000). Human Communication Theory and Research: Concepts, Contexts, and Challenges, 2nd Ed. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Hickman, G. (1998). Leading Organizations: Perspectives for a New Era. New York: Sage Publishers. Lynch, T. & Cruise, P. (2006). Handbook of Organization Theory and Management: the Philosophical Approach, 2nd Ed. New York: CRC Press. Lumpe, M. (2008). Leadership and Organization in the Aviation Industry. London: Ashgate Publishers. Lewis, D. (2001). The Management of Non-Governmental Development Organizations: An Introduction. London: Routledge Publishers. McKinlay, A. & Starkey, K. (1998). Foucault, Management and Organization Theory: from Panopticon to the Technologies of Self. New York: Sage Publishers. Netting, E. & Katherine, M. (2008). Organization Practice: A Guide to Understanding Human Service Organization. New York: John Wiley and Sons Publishers. Tsoukas, H. & Knudsen, C. (2003). The Oxford Handbook of Organization Theory. London: Oxford University Press. Vibert, C. (2004). Theories of Macro Organizational Behavior: A Handbook of Ideas and Explanations. New York: M.E. Sharpe Publishers. Read More