Sociology Paradigms and Organizational Analysis - Article Example

Multiple Perspectives Theories and theorizing are important features that every individual utilize everyday. Some theories or ideas seem true or wise sometimes like the old adage ‘You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it drink’ are filled with common sense and are applicable to daily life. Theorizing and theories are based on concepts and abstraction. Concepts provide means and mental categories for organizing, sorting and storing experiences in memory while ideas are formed through a process known as abstraction. Thus, the abstractions and concepts lead psychologists, scholars, researchers and scientist into development of different perspectives (multiple perspectives) of organizational theories. This is true for multiple perspectives: symbolic-interpretive, modern and postmodern (Burrell and Morgan, 1979). The theories and concepts of specific perspective offer specific tools that help in creating ideas about organizing and organizations. From personal view, some perspectives provide greater appeal for certain purpose compared to others. Therefore, understanding and having more knowledge of multiple perspectives, theories and concepts improves the position that an individual and managers will choose a useful approach to accomplish complexities that they face in their organizations. Some of the people who championed the idea of multi perspectives were British theorist Gareth Morgan and sociologist Gibson Burrell in the idea 1979 book Sociological Paradigms and Organizational Analysis (Burrell and Morgan, 1979). Burrell and Morgan argued that knowledge is based on different paradigms with which each comes with different assumptions about the world; thus from them, paradigms helps researchers to expound phenomena in different ways. Assumptions, beliefs and knowledge determine the way researchers will research, how leaders will manage their organizations and the relationship between different entities within the world (Miller, 1956). Moreover, many organizations operates in uncertain, complex and contradictory situations, and this calls upon managers, employees to devise ways to utilize less to expect more, maximize short and long term investment and be more efficient ensuring and championing ethical and humane environment. To understand and be able to compare the different multiple perspectives; modernism, symbolic-interpretivism and postmodernism, it is important first to understand the underlying assumptions of these perspectives; a starting point is epistemology and ontology (Hassard, 1988). The difference between this two (epistemology and ontology) is that ontology is based on how to choose to define what is real while epistemology is determined in knowledge and criteria that is used to evaluate it. Thus, ontology and epistemology provides means into which these multiple perspectives of organization theory through philosophical choices can be understood. Ontology can be viewed from two positions that of subjectivists at one end and on the other are objectivists. The same perspective is taken by epistemology in which one end is positivist and the other is interpretive (anti-positivist). Therefore, diversity in the approach of organizing and organizations theories requires extensive research and analysis of articles that researchers and authors have championed in their respective fields - an example presented by these multiple perspectives. Thus, the aim of this paper is to analyze some journal articles exploring different perspectives and the underlying assumptions and beliefs that the authors developed their own or objective analysis through developing basis for multiple organization perspectives. Goulding, C. (2003). Issues in Representing the Postmodern Consumer. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 6(3), 152 – 159. doi: 10.1108/13522750310478985 The author presents a research journal article expounding on the idea of postmodernism and issues that relates to positioning and representation of the consumer. Through the diverse literature, the author utilized qualitative methodology to collect the appropriate information. The author illustrates the conflict that exists in analyzing postmodern research and the role that theory play in understanding the requirements of consumers. It brings together numerous literatures in which the author utilizes them to collect information and she later synthesizes into a coherent article. The author found out that approaches linking consumer behavior with postmodern theories is minimal and champions the idea that rich and varied approach towards data collection should be embraced through cross-disciplinary integration developing a framework that centers on experience, expounded the debate on consumption and create meaningful external pictures. The paradigm that is used is interpretivism since it views the world of consumers and postmodern theory as correlated with science and concepts of reality. The author utilized other members’ meanings and definitions of situation in trying to understand how objective is consumer consumption. Schultz, M. and Hatch, M. (1996). Living with Multiple Paradigms: The Case of Paradigm Interplay in Organizational Culture Studies, Academy of Management Review, 21(2), 529-557. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/258671 This journal article is based on developing a new paradigm that balances interpretivism and functionalism within the region of organizational culture studies. The research article brings together their differences and connections (functionalism and interpretivism) into development of new strategy called the interplay. The authors utilized qualitative method in looking for information that is empirically recognized in connection and contrast between functionalism and interpretivism, and examining the implications of appreciating both the similarities and contrasts into reaching a middle ground (interplay). They utilize multi-paradigm research such as incorporating the three research paradigm: paradigm integration, paradigm incommensurability and paradigm crossing. The authors found out that functionalism and interpretivism and can be viewed through analyzing postmodern paradigm. It resulted in generation of three implications, which are clarity/ ambiguity, generality/ contextuality and stability/ instability. The approach or tradition that was utilized by the authors is constructivism because the authors view that there is a truth and knowledge that results in new strategies e.g. interplay and thus all truths are based on certain contextual meaning or perspective. Cooper, R. (1989). Modernism, Post Modernism and Organizational Analysis 3: The Contribution of Jacques Derrida. Organizational Studies, 10(4), 479-502. DOI: 10.1177/017084068901000402. This journal article is based on the writings of Jacques Derrida in trying to explain the concept of writing in organization settings and studies. The research article explores the aspect of process evident in social systems bringing into consideration three major aspects that play a major role in organizational and social analysis, which are writing, deconstruction and ‘difference’. Referencing the writings and analysis of Jacques Derrida, the authors find out that the logic behind writing is important in division of labor and an important dimension in terms of formalization and complexity of formal organization. Moreover, the results show that the main aim of many writings is to maintain consistency and stability rather than explore the organized world that the articles originate. Generally, Jacques Derrida writings are based on the concept of knowledge and power explicated by Michel Foucault. The authors approach towards analysis of the article is interpretivism in nature because they utilize the case study of Jacques Derrida through qualitative methodological approach. Cassell, C., Buehring, A., Symon, G. and Johnson, P. (2005). Qualitative Methods in Management Research: An Introduction to Themed Issue. Management Decision, 44(2), 161 – 165. DOI: 10.1108/00251740610650166. The authors present a journal article that illustrates the importance of qualitative research in the field of organizational studies and research. The research article focuses on introducing a themed issue about qualitative research in management and business field. The authors utilize a number of published articles through defining the term ‘qualitative research’ resulting in exploration of some examples. Qualitative research is an important issue in understanding the requirements and approaches that businesses takes but such researchers have not been published or have not been considered. Through analysis of numerous articles, the authors illustrate the usefulness of qualitative research to all paradigms and even advancing the importance of qualitative research in interpretivism. They found out that qualitative research is crucial in expounding the requirements of business and management obligations, and their importance can be exemplified in management field. The authors have used a combination of constructivism and interpretivism is exploring the importance of qualitative research in management circles. Burrell, G. (1994). Modernism, Postmodernism and organizational Analysis 4: The Contribution of Jurgen Habermas. Organization Studies, (15)1, 1-45. DOI: 10.1177/017084069401500101 The journal article explores the ideas and views of Jurgen Habermas. Jurgen Habermas viewed organizations in terms of modernist perspective. This research article analyses and expounds the debate on postmodernism and modernism illustrating its impact and relevance to organization studies. It quantitatively analysis the numerous articles that were written by Habermas, but the paper begins with affirming the difficulties that the author had to pass so that the paper could be reviewed and posted. Moreover, the subjective article explores the future of organizational studies in terms of social and philosophical science. Habermas article reflects the complications especially in terms of polity and economy in Germany showing that modernism of superior quality relative to postmodernism. The author states that it is disastrous to combine philosophy with social, an aspect that he links with seeking both the transcendental and empirical. Thus, modernism can be in terms of either seeking performativity – systematic modernists or seeking emancipation. The article embraces interpretivism because of combination of author’s subjective analysis with views and perspectives of Jurgen Habermas. Hackman, J. and Lawler III, E. (1971). Employee Reactions to Job Characteristics. Journal of Applied Psychology Monograph, 55(3), 259-286. This journal article explores the aspects that motivate employees in organization. The focus of the article is to understand the relationship and underlying principles, that employee reacts towards job characteristics within organization. Organization management and studies are paramount in understanding organization perspectives and theories. The research article that is based on quantitative methodology is based on the way employees work in an eastern telephone company. The data that was used was collected from thirteen jobs that brought into consideration 208 employees and 62 supervisors. The data was based on four dimensions: autonomy, task identity, variety, feedback, and measure of strength of the desires. The author found out that when the expectations are high within the four core dimensions are associated with high motivation, decrease in employee turnover, job satisfaction and resulting in quality work. The article is based on positivist paradigm because the authors utilized a number of variables e.g. employees and supervisors, and the entire research is based on observation; the data was collected from two entities e.g. employees and supervisors. Hage, J. (1965). An axiomatic theory of organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 10(3), 289-320 This journal explores the idea of development of an organization theory that is based on an axiomatic format. The authors utilized research approach in developing a framework that could form an axiomatic article. The paper utilizes two major variables: organization means and organization ends. From the two variables, eight variables are developed in which in organization means there are centralization, complexity, stratification and formalization while in the organization ends are the production, adaptiveness, job satisfaction and efficiency. Moreover, within the eight variables, seven simple prepositions arte developed and are used to derive twenty-one corollaries. The author found out that axiomatic theory view of ideal organizations in terms of two perspectives, which are organic model (emphasis on adaptiveness) and mechanistic model (emphasis on production). Moreover, the journal article is based on the writings of Barnard, Weber and Thompson. The article is based on positivist paradigm because of the variables and objectivity in analyzing articles that complements with axiomatic and organizational theories. Mumby, D. (1997). Modernism, Postmodernism, and Communication Studies: A Rereading of an Ongoing Debate. Communication Theory, 7(1), 1-28. The journal article tries to relate communication studies to organizational theories especially between modernist and postmodernist. This research article illustrates the link that is between different approaches towards organizations and the way that they can be brought together to explore their association with communication. The author used qualitative methodology in explaining the relationship between modernist and postmodernist perspectives. The relationship between modernism and postmodernism revolves on four discourses: positivism, interpretivism, critical theory and non-Marxism and postmodernism. Moreover, the author through ‘postmodern communication conditions’ illustrates the connection between postmodernism perspective and communication studies. The author views that postmodernism occurs in intersect of identity, communication and power. To achieve this, the author utilizes personal views (subjectivity) in exploring concept of modernism and postmodernism relative to communication. Moreover, utilizing different literature and other people views illustrate that the author utilized interpretivism paradigm. The author concludes by stating that a neutral point should be reached in understanding modernism and postmodernism through appreciating the similarities and connection of fundamentals of organization theories. Generally, it is evident that different authors and researchers view organizations differently. Goulding (2003) appreciates the importance of postmodernism perspective in understanding the requirements of consumer positioning. Burrell (1994) in view of Jurgen Habermas and Cooper (1989) acknowledging Jacques Derrida brings forth the importance and views that are shared in organization theories and theorizing. Cassel et al. (2005) appreciates the importance of qualitative research in understanding organization requirements. Hage (1965) through his axiomatic theory approach illustrate the usefulness and requirements of organizational perspectives in understanding the requirements of organizations. Mumby (1997) illustrates the importance of communication or language in understanding organization perspectives. Generally, researchers, authors and psychologists utilize theories and beliefs in understanding human behavior appreciating diverse ideological and principality of these individuals. Therefore, this means that there are many ways and approaches in which authors may utilize to understand occurrence (ontology) and reason (epistemology) why things are the way they are. References Burrell, G. (1994). Modernism, Postmodernism and organizational Analysis 4: The Contribution of Jurgen Habermas. Organization Studies, (15)1, 1-45. DOI: 10.1177/017084069401500101 Burrell, G. and Morgan, G. (1979). Sociology Paradigms and Organizational Analysis. London: Heinemann Publishers. Cassell, C., Buehring, A., Symon, G. and Johnson, P. (2005). Qualitative Methods in Management Research: An Introduction to Themed Issue. Management Decision, 44(2), 161 – 165. DOI: 10.1108/00251740610650166. Cooper, R. (1989). Modernism, Post Modernism and Organizational Analysis 3: The Contribution of Jacques Derrida. Organizational Studies, 10(4), 479-502. DOI: 10.1177/017084068901000402. Goulding, C. (2003). Issues in Representing the Postmodern Consumer. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 6(3), 152 – 159. doi: 10.1108/13522750310478985 Hassard, J. (1988). Overcoming Hermeticism in Organization Theory: An Alternative to Paradigm Incommensurability. Human Relations, 41(3), 247-159. Hackman, J. and Lawler III, E. (1971). Employee Reactions to Job Characteristics. Journal of Applied Psychology Monograph, 55(3), 259-286. Hage, J. (1965). An axiomatic theory of organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 10(3), 289-320 Miller, G. (1956). The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on Our Capacity for Processing Information. Psychological Review, 63(2), 81-97. Mumby, D. (1997). Modernism, Postmodernism, and Communication Studies: A Rereading of an Ongoing Debate. Communication Theory, 7(1), 1-28. Schultz, M. and Hatch, M. (1996). Living with Multiple Paradigms: The Case of Paradigm Interplay in Organizational Culture Studies, Academy of Management Review, 21(2), 529-557. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/258671 Read More