Recent orders
Modernist organizational theory
Critical Review
Name:
Institution:
Course:
Tutor:
Date:
Chapter 1: Introduction to organizational theory
Organizations can be defined as entities that are purposeful and goal oriented, however in including goals as part of the definition of an organisation means that there is consensus among members of the organization, which may not always be the case. In addition, the goals of the most powerful members or groups of the organization may be held in a more privileged position compared to those of the less powerful members (Jones, 2010 p 48). Organizational theory is important in our everyday lives since it influences our understanding of experiences within organizations and how we behave within those organizations (Burrell, 2003, p529). The perspectives that are taken in organizational theory should be keenly considered since they determine how people will understand organizations or how they will behave within their contexts. In understanding organizational theory, it is always necessary to make some philosophical assumptions, which act as a guidance tool; however, these assumptions are usually full of contentions since they usually do not have any evidence to support them.
Chapter 2: Modernist organizational theory: Back into the future
Modernist organizational theory argues that chaos and disorders among human beings can be overcome through human will and intentions, this means that the order can be maintained by creation of systems, bureaucracies and methods of management that aim at restoring order in a disorderly world. In understanding modernist organizational theory, it is important to look at the intellectual environment and organisations as part of systems; these can be looked at in two different ways. One of the ways is looking at the scientific activities that surround them which include development of the organizational theory; the second way is looking at the organizations as complex systems. Modernist organizational theory is more concerned about bureaucracy as a form of organizational and whether it is an agent of disorder and chaos in the world or it works to restore order in the world. Bureaucracy has been adopted in most of the organizations since the beginning of the 20th century as a means for efficient and effective organisations.
Neo-modernist organizational theory: putting people first
The modernist approach has been overtaken by the neo modernist approach, which puts the welfare of the people at the centre of the organization. The neo modernist organizational theory uses insight and techniques of the social sciences to build up an organizational and managerial presumption that is usable in problems connected with authority in organizational context. The neo modernist organizational theory pays special attention to the values and beliefs that individuals have and how they shape their experiences within organizations (Kets de Vries, 2004, p194). In addition, it also concentrates on how individual values and beliefs are shaped by their experiences in organizations, this leads to organizational culture and ways in which people’s needs can be woven in to those of organizations. This theory has two perspectives on how organizations are usually structured; the first perspective is where the management needs to be sensitive to the needs of the employees in order to create a conducive environment for all stakeholders of the organization. The second perspective is for the management of the organization to create a democratic space, which empowers all stakeholders in the organization (Westenholz, 2003, p110; Johnson, 2006).
Chapter 6: post modernism as a philosophy: the ultimate challenge to organizational theory?
Post modernism as a philosophy aims to disprove the modernist assumption that the world can be understood objectively by disproving the proposition that it is feasible to come up with a rational and generally applicable basis to scientific inquiry that can explain the universe from an objective point of view (Thompson, 2003, p185). Postmodernism has had the greatest impact on the organizational culture as it affects the values and beliefs of the stakeholders of the organizations.
Post modernism as a philosophy has expanded my knowledge on the thoughts of thinkers such as Jacques Derida; however, more explanation is needed on the basis of their critique of the modernist organizational theory.
Chapter 7: Reflective Organizational theory: symbols, meanings and interpretations
Reflective organizational theory emphasises on the way individuals give the happenings in the environment meaning and their ability to understand and reflect on the complexity of the organizations in which they work. In explaining how individuals interact with their environment, reflective organizational theory uses two approaches; they are symbolic interaction and phenomenology (Frenkel, 2003, p184). Symbolic interaction aims to explain how individuals can come together to achieve a certain purpose while phenomenology aims at describing and understanding of everyday activities of members in an organizations without using any past experiences or theories (Czarniawska and Sköldberg, 2003, p345; Jones, 2003, p87).
This chapter has shed light on new ways in which activities within an organisation can be understood without using any theories or experiences. An area that needs more explanation is the relationship between the two perspectives of reflective organisational theory; that is the link between symbolic interaction and phenomenology.
The evolution of management as reflected through the lens of modernist organizational theory
This chapter tries to understand managers as an organizational group that is different from management. Management has been depicted as having evolved during the last stages of industrial revolution; this evolution was accelerated by two related process that were taking place in industries at that time and they include delegation of responsibilities that were previously executed by owners to managers and expropriation by managers of the responsibilities that were previously performed by the employees. In this chapter, managers have been seen as either individuals who pursue the interests of the shareholders or their own self-interests (Child, 2005, p65).
This chapter has provided me with an insight on how the field of management evolved and how sometimes the interests of managers conflict with those of the shareholders. However, with the change in organizational structure role of managers has changed, which has not been explained in this chapter.
What I learnt from the course, my contributions and how the experience will shape my learning outcomes in the coming months
The course in organizational theory has helped me understand how organizations developed and how they run. The modernist organizational theory has enabled me understand how organizations were run in the 20th century through bureaucracies. The course has further broadened my knowledge in more recent ways of understanding organizations such as the neo modernist organizational theory that is concerned with the welfare of all the stakeholders of the organisations before organizational gains. In the context of neo modernist theory, control in organizations has been illuminated in terms of differentiating between formal and informal control and the types of formal control. Postmodernism organizational theory has helped in understanding two approaches that can be used in understanding organizations (Ritti & Levy, 2009, p 116). The first approach is where the term ‘postmodernism’ refers to a time in history that was characterized by vibrancy in organizations therefore having an effect on how organizations should be designed and run; the second approach refers to postmodernism as philosophical way of thinking. The chapter on postmodernism as a philosophy helps in understanding some theoretical perspectives that can be used in making sense of the events that happen in the world. In addition, this chapter sheds some light on the history and development of postmodernism theories and how it is practically impossible to develop an objective and generally accepted view of the world. Chapter 7 which deals with reflective organizational theory explains in details how individuals make sense of the world around them; in explaining this, the theory uses symbolic interaction which attempts to explain how people make sense of things around them and phenomenology which attempts to understand the world without the use of any theories or previous experiences. The course has also enabled me learn on managers and how they run the organisations, for instance, managers may run organizations for their own selfish benefits or for the benefit of shareholders.
In learning organizational theory, my contribution was asking questions that would help the students get better under of the subject matter of the course. In addition, I participated in group discussions as well as looking for other materials that would supplement what the teacher taught in class.
Learning the course will help me in the next courses that will touch on organizations since I will have some background information on how organizations are run. In addition, information gained from learning about how the various methods of managing organizations evolved up to the current ones will help me identify with ease the various methods that specific organizations use. Learning about managers and how they run organizations will also enable me to identify the best managerial tactics for successful organizations.
References
Burrell, G. (2003) ‘The future of organizational theory: Prospects and limitations’, in H. Tsoukas and C. Knudsen (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Organization Theory: Meta-Theoretical Perspectives, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 525–535
Child, J. (2005) Organization: Contemporary Principles and Practice, Oxford: Blackwell.
Czarniawska, B. and Sköldberg, K. (2003) ‘Tales of organizing: Symbolism and narration in management studies’, in B. Czarniawska and G. Sevón (eds), The Northern Lights –Organization Theory in Scandinavia, Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School Press.
Frenkel, S.J. (2003) ‘The embedded character of workplace relations’, Work and Occupations 30(2):135–153.
Johnson, P. (2006) ‘Whence democracy? A review and critique of the conceptual dimensions and implications of the business case for organizational democracy’, Organization 13(2):245–274.
Jones, G. R. (2010). Organizational theory, design, and change. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Jones, M. (2003) On Studying Organisational Symbolism, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kets de Vries, M.F.R. (2004) ‘Organizations on the couch: A clinical perspective on organizational dynamics’, European Management Journal 22(2):183–200.
Ritti, R. R., & Levy, S. (2009). The Ropes to Skip and the Ropes to Know: Studies in Organizational Theory and Behavior. John Wiley & Sons.
Thompson, P. (2003) Postmodernism-Fatal Distraction? Postmodernism and Organizations, J. Hassard and M. Parker (eds), London: Sage, pp. 181–204
Westenholz, A. (2003). ‘Organizational citizens – Unionized wage earners, participative management and beyond’, in B. Czarniawska and G. Sevón (eds), The Northern Lights –Organization Theory in Scandinavia, Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School Press
Modern Aspects of Poetry. Letters from Home by Elmaz Abinader 1954
Name
Professor,
Course
Date
Modern Aspects of Poetry. Letters from Home by Elmaz Abinader 1954An analysis of how symbolism and imagism as modern aspects of poetry have been used to illustrate history, and social change over time in ‘Letters from Home’ from Elmaz Abinader to her father Jean Abinader.
The main idea of the poem, is to show struggles of immigrants in history in Lebanon and, the change into modernization of society. In my opinion, this poem is positive as it highlights the issue of modernization and urbanization. It is relevant in modern times which have seen absorption of the Western culture into our society. It sheds light on the dispossession of social norms and culture with a shift from the old to the new throughout time.
According to Introduction to Modernist Poetry, symbolism is a representation of a symbol that carries a meaning and, represents an idea. Imagism on the other hand is when an author, uses an object that is not actually there to bring to mind mental images, sensation and, emotion of a particular literature.
Rachid Abi-Nader and, Jean Abinader kept diaries that have been used as symbols to represent the wider society in their struggles in Lebanon. The poems illustrate a piece of history that will be passed on to generations to come. The author, Elmaz has tried to bring to light the sufferings of the society that is, the Lebanese people through telling the story of a father and son (Abinader, p. 22).
Some of the elements of modern writing are discontinuous narrative, satire, juxtaposition, use of metaphor, and, irony. Juxtaposition is used to represent something that is unseen while irony and, satire would be used to show faults in the society. Elmaz in her book, Letters from Home, says that she doesn’t understand, her father’s language . This illustrates a shift to modernization, borrowing from other languages and, culture (22).
Elmaz has used characteristics of modern poetry in her poem when she writes, “your own children seem like nomads.” She has used this simile to describe the children to be people who move around from one place to another looking for, greener pasture in life. She portrays her family as very spiritual. She talks about her ill grandmother who notwithstanding her condition walks to church and, that the grandchildren pray (Abinader, p. 22).
Elmaz has used symbolism in the poem as she describes how Jean wiped tears when he read letters from old country. The tears from her father symbolize an emotion from difficult times they faced with his father while hiding from the Turks with no one to help him. The ironical element comes about when she says how her grandmother took her father to the closet to see linen that had turned yellow. This statement illustrates the irony of the era they lived in and, the fact that her grandmother had linen in her closet. Imagism has been used in the second paragraph as she describes the distance of the apartments where Jean cannot see his daughters at the window nor his sons in their room (Abinader, p. 22).
In conclusion, aspects in modern poetry of symbolism and, imagism have been well captured in the poem. These modern aspects of poetry have long created expressions, emphasis on imagination and emotions among the writers and readers as well.
Works Cited
Elmaz Abinader. Letters from Home: Stories of Fathers and Sons. University of Nebraska, Lincon. MI, January 1, 1985. Print.
Introduction to Modernist Poetry, Lesson 3. Edsitement . National Endowment for, the Humanities. Web. 5th Dec. 2011. edsitement.neh.gov/curriculum-unit/introduction-modernist-poetry
Moderator Tom Miller
Moderator Tom Miller:
Good Evening. National attention has been focused on the problems of the American Negro for the past several weeks. Major civil rights legislation from President Kennedy is now before Congress; huge demonstrations have been held across the country. Violence has erupted in many places. Last week on Florida forum we discussed the racial situation with Governor George Wallace of Alabama who tried unsuccessfully to bar the entrance of two Negro students to the University of Alabama. This week, we have invited author and playwright, James Baldwin, to express his views in this growing controversy. Mr. Baldwin is the best-selling author of several books that reflect on racial conflict. He is offered his intellectual and moral support to the cause of the American Negro and, tonight, he has interrupted his schedule in Puerto Rico, where he is writing a play, to answer questions from our panel and studio audience. Questioning Mr. Baldwin tonight will be WCKT newsman Al Dempsey and Dr. Charlton Tebeau, chairman of the history department of the University of Miami. There will also be questions from our studio audience, after this message.
To begin tonight’s program, we will ask Mr. Baldwin to state briefly if he feels the racial conflict in Alabama and Mississippi could happen here in Florida.
James Baldwin:
“Well, in my view, which I think is the view, I think, of most American Negroes or the experience of most American Negroes, the situation in Alabama and Mississippi, which is spectacular and surprises the country, is nationwide. Not only could it happen in Florida, it could happen in New York or Chicago, Detroit or anywhere there is a significant Negro population. Because, until the day all the Negroes in this country, in one way or another, in different fashions, North or South, are kept in what is, in effect, prison. In the North, one lives in ghettos and, in the South, the situation is so intolerable as to become sinister not knowing for Mississippi or for Alabama, or for Florida,but for the whole future of this country. White people are surprised, I think, at the vehemence of the Negro feeling and the depth of the danger, but I don’t think it has caught any Negro by surprise. One has been in a terrible, terrible situation for a very, very long time.”
MODERATOR:
“Now, to our panel, Mr. Dempsey.”
Al Dempsey:
“Well, why could it happen? Why does it have to be violence? Why can’t it be something other than violence?
James Baldwin:
“Well, part of the reason is one is doing one’s best to avoid violence. One of the reasons it could happen that way is because for so long, four hundred years, the American republic, in general, has ignored and denied the whole situation that Negroes have operated within – to be a source of cheap labor, for example, north or south, is to be, in effect, oppressed. Now, the oppression is bad enough. But the myth that the country’s created about the object of the oppression: the myth about the negro being happy in his place, is something the republic has managed to believe and, so that in addition to the fact of the oppression, one has also the fact that within the country for one hundred years there’s been a way of life occurring in the country, which most of the country knows nothing about. And it’s reflected, for example, in the way Negroes talk to each other. It’s a kind of language which does not really exist on what we like to think of as a major level of the American culture.”
Al Dempsey:
“But hasn’t there been a lethargy on the part of the American negro for that 100 year period too, along with the white supremacy added to it?”
James Baldwin:
“Um, I don’t think so. No. I think that’s, again, part of the myth. One has to remember, after all – I may sound very rude – but you have to remember who writes the history books and toward what end? I have never known a lethargic Negro. I’ve known demoralized Negroes. But that is not the same thing. The truth is that the Negroes have been fighting for this hundred years to obtain their rights and the country has ignored it. And the technique of the country has been mainly to accommodate it or to contain it, but never really to change the situation. And what has happened in our time, in these last few years, is that it’s no longer possible to contain it and the technique of accommodation has broken down. For the first time, really, the situation is now in the open. No American can ignore it, as has been true, let us say up until 1954.
Al Dempsey:
“All right. Why did it happen? Why do you think it happened? In 1954.”
James Baldwin:
“Well, the one thing, what happened in the South is that when the Supreme Court desegregated schools, or tried to desegregate schools, the South, which until that time had really ignored pleas, on the part the NAACP or responsible Negro leaders, to do something about creating a situation in the South…they were not asking for desegregation but to honor the separate but equal clause. And, the schools of the South were not equal.
Now, this meant, after ’54, the South which had ignored the necessities on the part of Negroes to be educated suddenly what leaped into that breach is now building schools for Negroes to keep the schools segregated. And this meant, in effect, that if I were a college president in the Deep South at a state college, that I had lost my position. I could no longer bargain. I couldn’t…I no longer had to go to the governor to get a new dormitory or a new chemistry lab. The governor was all too anxious to give me a new chemistry lab. That meant that I no longer had any effect, no power whatever. I couldn’t guarantee the facility of my students. The bargaining table had suddenly disappeared. This is what really happened, I think.”
Al Dempsey:
“Well, that was 1954. This is 1963. All of a sudden we have violence. That’s what we’re talking about here. Are you Negro leaders, and let’s consider you one of the Negro leaders…Are Negro leaders encouraging conditions of violence?”
James Baldwin:
“No. No responsible Negro leader can possibly – all the people I work with I know, are working as hard as they know how to channelize an energy which they know is there in order for it not to become violence. But, to be candid, there is something amazing, really, in the fact that the Negro has not been violent sooner, you know? There is something very impressive, in my view, in the ways which Negroes have managed to deal with this situation. And, the kind of discipline, the kind of interior discipline demanded of an adolescent to sit-in and to boycott and to undergo all the things one has to undergo is an extraordinary thing. And, if it were true that was a new Negro, that he’d never been seen before, that would be a miracle.
What has really happened is these people have been coming a long, long time. In the 30’s, for example, people like Roy Wilkins in the South, as hobos tried to organize unions and being beaten, and clubbed, and murdered. The Republic ignored all this. But every Negro child growing up knew something about it. It is the Republic, I repeat, that has been captured by its own myth of the subservient Negro and now is surprised to discover that the myth was never true.”
Dr. Charlton W. Tebeau:
“Mr. Baldwin, are you saying possibly that if “separate but equal” facilities had been provided for Negroes, that none of this might have happened?”
James Baldwin:
“No, I am not saying that at all. I didn’t mean to suggest that. But I did mean to suggest that the NAACP at that point, was not at that point trying to change the law, really, but doing, again, what Negroes are always trying to do, which is try and save the children. To try to get, to invest the children in the morale, and you can’t teach a child if the situation in which he is studying is intolerable. We all know that. Now, it is also true that you cannot really – no Negro child who is going to a segregated school, which costs millions of dollars, is fooled about why he’s there. He’s there because white people want him there and no place else. And you cannot educate a child in that context, either. You see?”
Dr. Tebeau:
“It seems to me also that while you are asking white people to change their estimate of the Negro – raise their estimate of the Negro – you are also saying to the Negro he ought to do something to raise his estimate of himself. Isn’t that true?
James Baldwin:
“It’s one of the great problems, let me put it this way, of being an American Negro in the first place; that you are taught, really, the entire weight of the republic teaches you to despise yourself. All the standards, when you open your eyes and look at the world, you look out at it, there is nothing reflecting you. As far as we can tell, for example, from television programs, there are no Negroes at all, or most Hollywood productions. The country has arbitrarily declared that kinky hair, dark skin, wide nose, and big lips is a hideous thing to be afflicted with. Now, the Negro parent, in this case, let’s say I am a Negro parent, has to use everything he can find to counteract the republic’s attempt to diminish this child. It is inevitable then, that when a boy becomes 20 or a girl becomes 20, they are in great battle inside to release themselves from what the country calls them. Do you see? Now, this estimate of oneself is a very difficult thing to change, but this is a part of the battle one has got to do that and, incidentally, by no means incidentally, I think that white Americans, themselves, assume something else. They assume that I live in a segregated society and they don’t realize that they live in a segregated society – that we do – and that the white child is really just as victimized by this peculiar medieval system as any Negro child. And what is worse for the Black child, the white child doesn’t know it and his whole attitude towards the world and toward reality is romantic.”
Dr. Tebeau:
“If I may have one more question… Why are you as doubtful as you are about what liberals are going to do for the cause of the Negro?”
James Baldwin:
“Because I’ve – I don’t mean to sound cruel – there are exceptions, but in general, my experience with liberals, they have attitudes, and they have all the proper attitudes. But they have no real convictions, and when the chips are down and you expect them to deliver and what you thought they felt they somehow are not there.”
Dr. Tebeau:
“Is that your estimate of the Kennedy administration to an extent?”
James Baldwin:
“My estimate of the Kennedy administration, part of my estimate of the Kennedy administration, is that, first of all, the Kennedy brothers, like almost all the white Americans, even with the best will in the world, know very little – in fact, I would hazard, until recently, virtually nothing about what we like to call the Negro problem. You know, most of the white Americans I’ve ever encountered – really, you know – had a Negro friend or a Negro maid or somebody in high school, but they never, you know, or rarely, after school was over or whatever, came to my kitchen. You know, we were segregated from the schoolhouse door. Therefore, he doesn’t know – he really does not know – what it was like for me to leave my house, leave school, and go back to Harlem. He doesn’t know how Negroes live and it comes as a great surprise to the Kennedy brothers and everybody else in the country, I’m certain, again, you know, that like most white Americans I’ve encountered, I am sure they have nothing against Negroes. That’s really not the question. The question really is a kind of apathy and ignorance, which is the price we pay for segregation. That’s what segregation means. You don’t know what is happening on the other side of the wall because you don’t want to know.”
SHARE THIS: