Generally Acceptable Body Of Organizational Theories Commerce Essay Example

often confuses individuals regarding appearances.

Clegg (2002) argues that understanding the human condition requires an understanding of the organizations in which it exists. Therefore, studying organizations is essential for comprehending the human condition because it examines how we collectively organize ourselves, create differences, and change our actions.

Moreover, studying organizations can explain individual actions within them and predict evolutionary patterns based on recurring observations of various organizational forms (John M et al., 2007).The functions of organizational studies have significantly advanced management theory, contributing to emergency management, risk prediction and prevention, and practical control of organizations. McAuley, Duberley, and Johnson (2007) introduced various organizational theories including Modernist, Neo-modernist, Postmodernist, and Reflective theories that have influenced the study of organizations.

Modernism Organization Theory

According to the online journal (2006), modernist organization theory suggests that organizations are objectively real entities operating in the real world. When well-designed and managed, they function as decision and action systems driven by norms of reason, efficiency, and effectiveness for the benefit of the state. This theory focuses on identifying universal laws, methods, and techniques for organizational management and control. It favors rational structures, rules, standardized procedures, and routine practices. Research conducted by Paul S.A., Linda F., and Hugh W. (2007) indicates that this type of organizational structure is efficient and effective for decision making and management while also facilitating organizational development and promoting fairness within organizations. However,it pays less attention to mainstream aspects such as human conditions,s relations between people , environmental concerns,and women's rights

Neo-modernist Organization Theory

Modernist organization theory, which has been studied since the 20th century and is widely accepted for organizational development, requires revisions to certain concepts in light of current trends. The newer

developed neo-modernist organization theory focuses on attending to human conditions within organizations and prioritizes human resources. It incorporates insights and approaches from the social sciences to create a unique organization theory that can be applied to management and leadership issues (Journal, 2006).

In today's competitive and diverse societal environment, organizations must give more attention to human resource development in order to enhance creativity and competitiveness due to globalization and demands for human rights. Mainstream concepts like feminism have also compelled organizations to prioritize their workforce. As a result, the traditional modernist organization theory, characterized by its rigid efficiency and effectiveness with less consideration for human needs, is gradually being replaced by the neo-modernist organization theory.

On the other hand, the postmodernist organization theory offers a new perspective compared to the modernist theory.The Journal (2006) states that the development of organization theory has been influenced by the rapid growth of the global economy and the internet, which have a significant impact on people's behavior. The focus is on planning organizations, increasing dynamism and diversity, and embracing flexible thinking. Today's organizations require features such as flexibility, multi-skilling enhancement, importance of knowledge work, and flexible use of labor due to the post-industrial and information developed society. This rapid development also greatly impacts human thinking and behavior, leading to the evolution of organization theory.

Furthermore, there is a new theoretical position called reflective organization theory or postmodernist approach which emphasizes understanding the world around us. This approach helps organizations recognize the importance of nature to individuals and personal relationships within organizations. When applied in management, this understanding can assist directors in meeting people's needs within complex organizations.

J (2007), (Journal 2006) suggest that

these subjects and theories are significant as they help organizational members deeply understand their circumstances for learning and growth purposes.The previous mentioned studies highlight the significance of studying both nature and the social aspects of human beings and society. This research aims to explain and predict the development of various organizational forms and management practices, in order to enhance their effectiveness and efficiency. Additionally, it addresses the needs of both mainstream and social environments, thereby improving organizational competitiveness.

Case Study

This section will analyze management principles through a case study on the reform of China's state-owned enterprises (SOEs). However, due to the complexity of this reform involving significant social and economic decisions made by the Chinese government, only a few management issues within SOEs will be introduced and analyzed using management principles. By examining the purpose and problem-solving process, we can present these principles. The focus primarily lies on four paradigms:

- The functionalist paradigm seeks to provide rational explanations for human affairs (Burrell, G., & Morgan, G., 1979).
- The text discusses different paradigms related to sociology.
- It starts by mentioning sociological positivism which takes a matter-of-fact approach focusing on studying concrete relationships through scientific discipline.
- This paradigm has also been slightly influenced by dreamer and Marxist thought.The text discusses different paradigms - the interpretative paradigm, the humanist paradigm, and the structuralism paradigm - that explain behavior stability from individual perspectives. The interpretative paradigm focuses on understanding ongoing subjective processes and highlights the spiritual nature of the universe. The humanist paradigm emphasizes overcoming social restraints to fulfill human potential, while acknowledging a gap between true consciousness and ideological superstructures. Lastly, the structuralism paradigm believes radical

change is inherent in social structures, often brought about by conflicts in contemporary society. According to Xiaozu W.'s research (2004), China's reform of State-owned Enterprises (SOEs) began in the 1980s and remains incomplete. This reform has had both positive and negative effects on China's economic growth and its citizens' lives, progressing through three phases since 1984. [Source: hypertext transfer protocol://faculty.babson.edu/krollag/org_site/org_theory/Scott_articles/burrell_morgan.html]

Phase 1: 1984-1992

During the period from 1984 to 1992, state-owned enterprises (SOEs) in China faced various management issues. One of the main problems was that these SOEs were owned by the Chinese government. Another issue was that employees' salaries were not based on their performance, resulting in workers with different levels of performance receiving equal pay. This significantly affected employee motivation. To address these problems, the government introduced changes such as granting more autonomy and financial incentives to SOE managers and linking employees' pay to their performance.

Phase 2: 1993-2002

From 1993 to 2002, an important change took place in small SOEs through partial privatization. Xiaozu W.'s (2004) research highlights this as the predominant change during this decade. The increasing competitiveness within China's economic system posed significant challenges for SOEs. In order to promote privatization, many small SOEs underwent ownership transfers by the Chinese government, leading to over 10 million workers being laid off. This has resulted in substantial social and governmental pressure.

In the third phase of reforms starting from 2002 until today, there has been a shift towards diversifying ownership structures for SOEs due to China's integration into the global economy. As people's behavior and mindset rapidly changed along with this integration process, it fostered the development and restructuring of private

organizations alongside state-owned enterprises.The slow reform process of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) under government control was unable to meet the demands of a highly competitive environment. Consequently, the third phase focused on transforming ownership structures to enhance the reform process and improve competitiveness in the global market. This was necessary because one of the main challenges faced by SOEs in China during the 1980s was government control over ownership, which hindered incentives for directors and employees. Additionally, directors were required to have a political background due to unique societal norms at that time, leading to situations where managers prioritized political accomplishments over organizational benefit. To address these issues, ownership liberation became a major task in SOE reform. Another significant problem in the 1980s was employee surplus, as most SOEs had excessive staff but low efficiency. This resulted from factors such as outdated technology requiring larger workforces and societal responsibility dictating job positions for all workers when private businesses were scarce at that time.The lack of incentives for workers resulted in high value but low efficiency, leading to a high unemployment rate during the second phase of SOE reform. Additionally, the early period suffered from a low level of professionalism in organizational management, resulting in confusion and inefficiency due to a lack of professional managers and policy issues. According to Jonathan R. Woetzel's (2008) research, the reform procedure of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) in China has been highly successful over the past two decades. In this analysis, we will examine the management rule from four paradigms: Functionalist Paradigm, Interpretive Paradigm, Radical Humanist Paradigm, and Radical Structuralist Paradigm. The study suggests that state-owned companies in China are diverse and

some may make better partners for multinational corporations compared to private-sector counterparts. The key to their success lies in openness rather than ownership as SOEs have successfully transformed their appearance and performance over the past 20 years in line with government expectations.The Chinese government initially acknowledged that the management, organizational structure, and performance of State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs) were not suitable for market competition. To address this issue, they decided to transfer ownership to private entities or adopt a diverse approach in order to enhance the competitiveness and performance of SOEs. The results over the past 20 years have shown that this government action has successfully tapped into the potential of SOEs and improved their performance. Furthermore, there has been an increase in employee surplus.

Previously, SOEs in China lacked productivity and operated with low technology levels. The Chinese government attributed this inefficiency to ownership problems, which not only dampened enthusiasm but also led to wasteful use of labor resources. Ownership transformations were initiated by the government to tackle these issues, resulting in layoffs and individuals pursuing alternative careers. Although this initially created societal and governmental pressures, it ultimately unleashed people's potential and significantly contributed to economic development.

Another obstacle was the absence of professional managers, hindering efficient operations and undermining motivation within SOEs.In order to address the issue, the Chinese government implemented a comprehensive solution focused on ownership transformation. This involved introducing the "contract duty system," which linked individual directors' performance with their responsibilities, and granting them greater financial and decision-making power. The goal was to improve management performance. In 1978, Deng Xiaoping, Chairman of the People's Republic of China (PRC), visited the Shenzhen economic special development

zone and realized that relinquishing ownership to private proprietors would stimulate economic development. This visit greatly influenced Deng Xiaoping's economic development concept and marked China's openness to the world and subsequent success. Personal experiences or beliefs can significantly impact decision-making for organizational directors. A case study by Russell S., Zhaiqing G., and Wang J. (2001) explored Qi Hong's experience of being laid off in 1997 and starting his own career. By 2001, Qi Hong had become a well-known entrepreneur in Liaoning Province, reflecting both an individual phenomenon and a government policy decision.During the second phase of reforms from 1993 to 2002, the Chinese government implemented measures to reduce surplus employees and increase the efficiency of State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs). This involved laying off ten million people with two goals: firstly, to promote China's economic development by compelling these individuals to restart their careers; and secondly, to improve organization management within SOEs. The potential of SOE managers has been affected by specific government policies under certain circumstances. The interpretative paradigm is crucial in analyzing management principles, particularly for decision-making processes. In terms of the Humanistic Paradigm, ownership transforming becomes a focal point as it emphasizes the study of human behavior. Initially, during the reform process for SOEs in China, incentivizing people's creativity challenged basic management theory. Through this reform process, ownership was transferred to private entities and employee performance became linked to regular output, greatly stimulating activity and motivation. However, this situation also presents a troubling issue of employee excess where having multiple non-contributing individuals in one position can be detrimental.Millions of people lost their jobs due to the reform, leading to different outcomes. The first situation

stifles creativity and career aspirations, while the second situation motivates individuals to explore new career paths and tap into their creativity for growth. Although the Chinese authorities had no other choice at the time, it also spurred rapid economic development in terms of management positions. As per postmodernist organisation theory, humans are central to organizations, aligning with management theory. In today's global economy, knowledge workers play a crucial role in organizations and management practices. This is evident in China's State-Owned Enterprises (SOE) reform where professional managers drive economic development. The Structuralist Paradigm emphasizes objective research and study of management principles to achieve goals. In the case of managing large organizations in China, the focus was on economic development which necessitated transforming ownership from state-owned to private proprietors. While this structuralist approach may appear harsh in some instances, it is necessary from an objective standpoint to lay off certain employees.From an objective standpoint, what is needed for State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs) is proficient management to effectively advance the entire process and achieve desired objectives. The operational approach of SOEs in China has undergone a transformation in their self-perception and overall performance. This examination of organization theory emphasizes the growing significance of individuals and knowledge workers in organizational management, particularly with the expansion of global economies. The progression from modernist to reflective organization theory underscores the importance of studying human behaviors. This theory aids in identifying, explaining, and predicting the correlation between human behaviors and organizational development, as well as their ties to the social environment. Through an analysis of management principles and practices, this case study investigates the reform of SOEs in China by showcasing the diverse

aspects of four paradigms and various factors that influence management decisions.