Organizational Theory
Introduction
The theories of `modern', ‘symbolic interpretive’, ‘critical theories’ and `postmodern' are commonly used in intellectual debates on the studies of organization and these various theories are interpreted as perspectives. In this paper I argue that what distinguishes each theory can be understood by its differences in thinking style, each having it’s own inclination of ontological commitments and theoretical fixations. Modernism acknowledges the existence of reality regardless of whether they are visible or not through the use of common organizational terms such as “organizations”, “structure”, etc.
However the critical theorist critiques this reasoning and concludes that the modernist way of thinking obscure the truth of reality with tainted ideology.
Postmodernist thinking refutes this reality and believes that realty is transformational and continuously in flux. Symbolic Interpretive gives an insight as to how truth is socially constructed and that people agree upon these meaningful realities.
The consequences of the various perspectives mode of thoughts on how technology will determine the future of organizations are then explored in more detail.
Mordernist viewpoint:
In general technology is defined as the usage of knowledge and organization to produce techniques and objects for the attainment of specific goals that may include practical reasons, symbolic reasons, or for reasons of generating profit.
From the modernist point of view, organizations are seen as technology used for the means of providing needs and wants (Hatch and Cunliffe, 2006).
There is a correlation between technology and organization in the way that the firm’s technologies influences the organization structure of an organization at administrative and operational level that in turn affects the performance of the firm (K.Abdul Ghani, 2002).
As shown by Joan Woodward in her 1960’s research on technologies that consisted of 100 manufacturing organizations in south
The theories of `modern', ‘symbolic interpretive’, ‘critical theories’ and `postmodern' are commonly used in intellectual debates on the studies of organization and these various theories are interpreted as perspectives. In this paper I argue that what distinguishes each theory can be understood by its differences in thinking style, each having it’s own inclination of ontological commitments and theoretical fixations. Modernism acknowledges the existence of reality regardless of whether they are visible or not through the use of common organizational terms such as “organizations”, “structure”, etc.
However the critical theorist critiques this reasoning and concludes that the modernist way of thinking obscure the truth of reality with tainted ideology.
Postmodernist thinking refutes this reality and believes that realty is transformational and continuously in flux. Symbolic Interpretive gives an insight as to how truth is socially constructed and that people agree upon these meaningful realities.
The consequences of the various perspectives mode of thoughts on how technology will determine the future of organizations are then explored in more detail.
Mordernist viewpoint:
In general technology is defined as the usage of knowledge and organization to produce techniques and objects for the attainment of specific goals that may include practical reasons, symbolic reasons, or for reasons of generating profit.
From the modernist point of view, organizations are seen as technology used for the means of providing needs and wants (Hatch and Cunliffe, 2006).
There is a correlation between technology and organization in the way that the firm’s technologies influences the organization structure of an organization at administrative and operational level that in turn affects the performance of the firm (K.Abdul Ghani, 2002).
As shown by Joan Woodward in her 1960’s research on technologies that consisted of 100 manufacturing organizations in south