HRM Organizational Theory - Essay Example

HRM Organization Theory Introduction: Current trends in business across the world have brought a transformational change in overall organizational structure. Change in organizational structure has further increased the operational and ethical responsibilities of the organization. The new global perspective has transformed organizations as social institutions. This indicates the addition of new dimensions of responsibilities into human resource management. New perspectives of organizational theory have broadened the horizon of organizational research and methodology. The main objective of the new perspectives of organizational theory is to provide a comprehensive understanding of this complex organizational structure. This paper addresses the recent developments in organizational theory and practice with special reference to the description of its three main perspectives - modern, symbolic-interpretive and postmodern perspectives of organizational theory. It looks into the relevant issues addressed in these perspectives that help understand the complex organizational phenomena including the physical structure of organizations as well as their culture and power. Organizational theory and new perspectives: The idea of an organizational theory aims to offer a clear and comprehensive introduction to the study of organizations and organizing processes. In general, organizational theory can be characterized as an intellectual activity that involves explanations of how things happen in organizational environment. Current businesses focus on a multi-perspective approach to describe various organizing processes and organizational structures. This is important with regard to the study of recent perspectives in organizational theory. That is to say, there is a growing requirement among the human resource management of organizations to understand and explain the complex organizational systems so that balance can be maintained among its various systems and sub-systems while competitive advantage is achieved for the overall organization. One of the recent overviews of organizational theory is featured by the assembling of different approaches into three main perspectives as discussed by Hatch and Cunliffe (2006). These three perspectives are: modern, symbolic (or symbolic-interpretive), and postmodern. Modern perspective is based on a belief of an objective and external reality where truth is discovered by means of valid conceptualization and reliable measurement of the knowledge about the objective world. Organizations are considered as real entities operating in a real world. Management in such organizations is responsible making business decisions and actions driven by the norms of rationality, efficiency and effectiveness. The organizational system is supportive of rational structures, rules, standardized procedures and routine practices. Coming to the symbolic-interpretive perspective, it supports subjectivism unlike modern perspective of objectivism. It argues that all knowledge is relative to the knower. The construction of truth is based on multiple interpretations of the objects of knowledge. Therefore, truth is socially constructed and is subject to change over time. Organizations are considered as socially constructed realities where meanings are promoted by the understanding of the self and others that occurs within the organizational context. This organizational theory focuses on the importance of interpretive and symbolic acts, forms and processes with regard to explaining personal experiences within specific contexts. The foundation of the postmodern perspective is based on the parameters of social discourse. Postmodernism supports that knowledge is not an accurate account of truth as meanings are never fixed. Whatever is spoken of as reality is just interpretation(s) of it. Postmodern theorists encourage reflexive and inclusive forms of theorizing and organizing that reveal marginalized and oppressed viewpoints. As Corman and Poole state, postmodern theorists argue that “the search for knowledge remains centered on casual explanations for regularities observed in the physical and social world.” (Corman and Poole, 2000, p. 60) These three perspectives can be compared and contrasted in terms of their ontological and epistemological commitments (Bryman and Bell, 2007). In terms of the modernist perspective, the horizon of knowledge is limited to the diameters of our five senses, in other words, to the empirical reality. Symbolic-interpretive perspective extends this limit to include forms of experience that lie outside the reach of the five senses, that is, to include subjective reality. When modernists and interpretivists debate over objective (empirical) and subjective reality, postmodernists find a striking dissimilarity from these two perspectives in their unwillingness to seek truth. Postmodern theorists argue that since knowledge is power, the development and use of knowledge are always power plays that must be resisted for the sake of the powerless. Conceptualization of organizational theory: Issues and concepts The structure of an organization is conceptualized to have the following major components: social structure, physical structure, culture, power (and politics) and technology. The idea of social structure of an organization refers to a collective entity structured on the basis of certain (related) set(s) of roles with different functions, meanings or purposes. It provides notable insights on the operability, efficiency, effectiveness and flexibility of the organization. In other words, the social structure of an organization can play crucial role in determining its flexibility or capacity to change. Development of the concept of an organizational structure is equally significant for its management. The physical structure of an organization is important in the sense that an office building is a workplace accommodating information gathering and knowledge processing activities. Premises indeed can play a significant role in affecting organizational productivity as well as in supporting corporate mission. Current business trends are fast changing the requirements of the physical structure of organizations. With globalization, information technology and market integration processes, the demand for intelligent office buildings is going higher. Organizational concepts are changing, and so are the building designs in accordance with the environmental changes. Again, the change is necessary to meet the core demands of individual as well as workplace behavior. That is to say, the design of office buildings has strong influence over the behavioral patterns, both individual and collective, of the workplace. When it comes to relating the definition of organization with culture, organization itself is a cultural phenomenon. The concept of an organizational culture denotes its psychology, attitudes, experiences, beliefs and values. As Morgan states, “daily life in an organizational society is full of peculiar beliefs, routines, and rituals that identify it as a distinctive cultural life…important dimensions of modern culture are rooted in the structure of industrial society, the organization of which is itself a cultural phenomenon.” (Morgan, 1998, p. 113-114) It is important for the management to have a clear and comprehensive understanding of the organizational culture it promotes. While explaining the dynamics of culture in the context of organizational structure, another important issue is the relationship between culture and leadership. As Schein (2004) argues, culture and leadership are conceptually intertwined in the sense that the function of leadership is essential at all levels of the organization to recognize and destroy culture when complex situations of organizational culture make it dysfunctional. Further, the concept of culture imbibes certain characteristic features into the understanding of organizational culture including structural stability, depth, breadth, and patterning or integration (Schein, 2004, p. 14). The issue of leadership includes another important aspect - that is - the concept of power and politics in organizations. Power can be defined as the opportunity as well as the capacity for the leader to create, build, develop and achieve what he or she desires. The concept of organizational politics is closely associated with that of power as the former can be conceived as the use of power where power is viewed as a source of potential energy to manage relationships. Therefore, leadership involves skills of developing as well as exercising power and politics. So power is “a concept for understanding leadership” while at the same time, it is “a tool that allows organizations to function productively and effectively” (Pfeffer, 1992, p. 12). It is notable that power and influence can be acquired and exercised for wrong purposes. But this will simply misplace truth in decision making processes. Therefore, exercise of power and politics in favor of collective benefits in the organizational environment is important in order to enhance coordination and cooperation among individuals and work groups. “Power is defined here as the potential ability to influence behavior, to change the course of events, to overcome resistance, and to get people do things that they would not otherwise do.” (Pfeffer, 1992, p. 30) The advancement of technology plays a crucial role in improving organizational culture as well as efficiency of leadership. Transformation in information technology has significant contribution to the development of task-oriented work groups (May and Mumby, 2005). While the use of technology creates efficient work units in an organization, it enhances individual and collective performance standards, decision support systems and overall organizational standards. “Group support systems combine communication, computer, and decision technologies to support meetings, decision making, and related group activities.” (May and Mumby, 2005, p. 183) New perspectives: A broader speculation Integration is a practice every organization is following today. The practice of a business approach with multiple perspectives is what is required by the human resource management of organizations to understand organizational phenomena. Modern perspective involves decision making processes based on differential logical structure (Hassard and Pym, 1990). So communication plays a determining role as the underlying principle of all methods. Structures of communicative interaction are relevant for organizations or rather social organizations to achieve competitive advantage. The symbolic-interpretive approach develops the modernist perception of realities by adding subjective reality. The interpretive perspective is focused on “meaning and meaning-making in specific situational contexts and on processes of sense-making (modernism) more broadly” (Tsoukas and Knudsen, 2003, p. 70). Meaning, understanding and interpretation of matters are significant in conceptualizing organizational culture. Having rejected the modernist perception of the so-called realities - truth, beauty and morality, the postmodernist tradition has welcomed the emergence of a plurality of epistemologies as a search for new modes of representing knowledge (Hancock and Tyler, 2001). The nature of postmodernist knowledge can be conceptualized as the relationship between knowledge and power, and its socio-cultural mediation in the form of discourse. In a present day organizational setup, discourse can be understood as various practices determining the context and constitution of reality. Conclusion: As business trends and marketplace concepts are changing, it is important that organizational structures involve in developing assimilation in terms of adopting a multiple perspectives approach for a better understanding of different organizational phenomena. Modernist tradition of logical structure is important for developing objective realities in the organization while communication plays the interconnectivity role among systems and employees. Interpretive perspective is focused on developing the subjective realities, components of the understanding of organizational culture. Postmodernist perspective relies on the notion of social discourse to develop core topics such as the relationship of knowledge and power. Instead of emphasizing on one perspective, it is significant to adopt a multiple approach combining all perspectives, which develops the organization as a knowledge entity, enhances effectiveness and efficiency of its systems and sub-systems, and eventually results in attaining competitive advantage. References: 1. Bryman, A. and Bell, E., 2007. Business Research Methods. 2nd edition. New York: Oxford University Press. 1. Corman, S. R. and Poole, M. S. (eds.), 2000. Perspectives on Organizational Communication: Finding Common Ground. New York: Guildford. 1. Hancock, P. and Tyler, M., 2001. Work, Postmodernism and Organization: A Critical Introduction. London: Sage. 1. Hassard, J. and Pym, D., 1990. The Theory and Philosophy of Organizations: Critical Issues and New Perspectives. London: Routledge. 1. Hatch, M. J. and Cunliffe, A. L., 2006. Organization Theory: Modern, Symbolic and Postmodern Perspectives. 2nd edition. London: Oxford University Press. 1. May, S. and Mumby, D. K. (eds.), 2005. Engaging Organizational Communication Theory and Research: Multiple Perspectives. California: Sage. 1. Morgan, G., 1998. Images of Organization. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler. 1. Pfeffer, J., 1992. Managing with Power: Politics and Influence in Organizations. Boston: Harvard University Press. 1. Schein, E. H., 2004. Organizational Culture and Leadership. 3rd edition. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 1. Tsoukas, H. and Knudsen, C., 2003. The Oxford Handbook of Organization Theory: Meta-theoretical Perspectives. New York: Oxford University Press. Read More