These standards have arisen without sound testing of whether these standards are, in fact, objective measures of quality (Eichler 1988). Wilson's views are in part countered by Stephen Linstead who while acknowledging the quality of Wilson's work argues that it does a disservice to the main thinkers who laid the theoretical groundwork of the modern O.T. This paper will raise the arguments of these two views and attempt to evaluate them on their respective merits .
Wilson's review goes over a great deal of research in the field of O.T and consistently finds evidence of gender blindness in O.T. In covering the research and challenging the assumptions of the studies from the perspective of her thesis of gender blindness she raises many questions for further research. Sometimes the questions raised contradict one another such as the indexing of absolute standards to male attributes and not to the consideration
of the objective value of such indices's and whether sometimes so called female attributes may in some cases be the true standard(Eichler 1988); then she later calls into question the whole debate of the study of differences as a pursuit without rationale in light of changing workforce patterns, but to draw this out as a structural flaw in her argument is really not fair since she is challenging individual research conclusions on their original assumptions and not trying to make overarching conclusions about gender differences but rather asking researchers to at least adopt paradigms that allow for new questions(Wilson 1996). This spirit of valuable inquisition runs through her article. In an important highlight of this work She brings many strongly held notions to task such as the idea of assertiveness in itself being a virtue and asks why the relational aspect of O.T has rested on the male idea of hierarchy structures being based on power and authority rather than the attribute valuation emphasized in the female style of management( Rosener 1990) . This is in essence summed up as the difference between a hierarchal schema and a web based organization where relational values are emphasized(Crawford and Maracek 1989). Later she makes the strong argument that the traditionally thought of distinctions of male assertiveness is based more in power relations than in the notion of gender(Snodgrass 1992). To dismiss her review as a reflexive call to focus solely on the gender inequities is do her an injustice as she herself denigrates the notion of analysis based on that approach. Rather she calls for an actual consideration of gender in Organizational Theory especially in light of the increasing role
of women in the workforce. This is especially important since the researchers such as Richard Brown (1976) and Janet Wolff (1977) have noted the inequities that Wilson argues for some time without much change.
Stephen Linstead acknowledges the quality of Wilson's review and agreeing
that the modern technical studies of OT are guilty of the gender blindness that Wilson claims but he disagrees with Wilson about the early theorists such as Laslow and Weber , Taylor and Mayo. These men he argues were not gender blind but rather suppressed gender as they did other variables to arrive at a theoretical framework that was applicable in a
Cite this document
(“Organizational Theory Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words”, n.d.)
Retrieved from https://studentshare.net/philosophy/290099-organizational-theory
(Organizational Theory Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 Words)
“Organizational Theory Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 Words”, n.d. https://studentshare.net/philosophy/290099-organizational-theory.
Cited: 0 times
Organizational Theory (O.T) describes the set of principles of most effective utilization of a work force. Today in a diversified economy marked by a greater proportion of female and minority workers than ever before such principles ideally should lay out theories that account for the heterogeneous nature of such a work force…
To offset this communication problems, but at the same time maintain span of control there are two possible solutions. The first is standardization. In standardization, control over employees is retained by their behavior, and thus minimizing the requirement of direct control.
A functional structure is very simple and is commonly employed in businesses. Functional structure has significantly developed functional departments having specific functions and well defined role in the overall work. Departments in a functional structure include but are not limited to accounting, administration, operations, HR, marketing, design and engineering (Jones).
Abilities shown in such activities make the system more efficient, innovative, creative and conducive for a higher quality, and hence, the satisfaction of the customer (Jones). In order for an organization to gain competitive advantage, its strategies should be consistent with the macro and micro environment and also, make part of the organization’s value creation process.
These competitive advantages can be acquired through division of labor in the growth stage. Organizations need their entrepreneurs to develop the skills to create and introduce new products, and to enhance organizational learning. To achieve this, organizations need to put in efforts to grow in different stages which include growth through creativity (stage 1), growth through direction (stage 2), growth through delegation (stage 3), growth through coordination (stage 4), and growth through collaboration (stage 5).
Innovation within an organization sees quantum technological change and incremental technological change. Since innovation is expensive, it needs to be protected through copyrights, patents and trademarks. Intrapreneurship is the innovation and new product development by entrepreneurs within established organizations.
The organization’s structure decides role of subunits as per the requirements of its strategic goals that it maintains in order to get competitive advantaged. The level of interdependence of subunits varies from one organization’s structure to another.
The main reason for maintaining the balance of power is that it improves the quality of decision making. That is, when there is equal distribution or balance of power among the stakeholders there is bargaining from all stakeholders before agreeing on a decision.
The conclusion from this study states that critical theory and studies of management are slowly chipping away at traditional organizational practices that emphasize hierarchical structures with rigid procedures and institutionalized wisdom that tend to maintain a status quo among the elite and create disparities among the various social classes working in the organization.
Some of the factors leading to organizational decline are:
Too much bureaucracy in the culture of an organization may easily lead it to decline. In many big organizations, rights of property become very well-built and strong. Their strength often causes