[Xmca-l] Re: An article on the evolution of organizational paradigms you might find interesting

[Zlatko Bodrozic]

Many thanks for your comments, Mike.

Since I was a PhD student I was fascinated by Scribner's (1985) analysis 
of "Vygotsky's Uses of History,".
One could say that our paper (and my PhD) was inspired by her article. 
We study the connection between
(1) the long-term evolution of technologies
(2) the long-term evolution of organizational paradigms
(3) the long-term evolution of  management models
(4) micro processes of organizational and managerial innovation
(see the attached figure for a visualization)

For the long-term technological processes, relying on a 
neo-Schumpeterian framework (Carlota Perez), we study subsequent 
technological revolutions (railway, steel &electricity, automobile, 
ICT). We argue that the emergence of a technological revolution in 
leading industries generates radically new organizational and management 
problems. The solution to these problems takes the form of a new 
organizational paradigm (professionally-managed firm, factory, 
corporation, network). This new paradigm emerges in two cycles. In a 
first cycle, we see the emergence of a new management model that 
represents a revolutionary break with the prevailing organizational 
paradigm (Line-and-staff, Scientific management, Strategy-and-structure, 
Business process). The appearance of this model typically generates 
unintended consequences (often related to human problems), which in turn 
prompt a second cycle that generates another management model that 
rectifies those dysfunctions and thereby rebalances and stabilizes the 
new organizational paradigm (Industrial betterment, Human relations, 
Quality management/organizational culture and learning, Knowledge 
management).

(The connection to individual human development would be: An 
organizational expert working in the early 19th century, time-traveling 
into the present, would first need to master many of the lessons 
accumulated by the successive paradigms and models of the last century 
and a half. Each of the models that has left its mark on the overall 
evolution of management and organization offers a lesson for the 
individual.)

We clearly see connections between this four processes, and—coming now 
to your question—we would also argue that there should be connections to 
the the longer-term evolution of social institutions. Actually, Paul 
Adler and I currently study the evolution of workplace communities—the 
fabric of workplace social relations—, and we are confident that we can 
make a connection to the 4 processes mentioned above.

Regarding the question of an "orthogenetic principle": I need to think 
about this more. What we say in our paper is that the we see indicators 
of growing complexity of the division of labor, growing interdependence 
among actors, and increasing scope of the corresponding integration and 
control efforts. These indicators might be read as related to what Paul 
Adler (2012) calls the “socialization of production”, but we have to 
explore this more.

Kind regards, Zlatko


> Thank you for this paper, Zlato. We have not heard from Paul on this list
> for years, but
> his work has remained on the horizon. Now you have brought it back to us in
> an interesting formulation.
>
> I was struck by the parallels between the way you framed your question and
> the question that developmental psychologists (perhaps pedologists,
> David?):
>
>   we argue that technology is a powerful factor shaping the evolution of
> management models’ contents
>
> a couple of months ago Roy Pea gave a talk at the Piaget society meetings
> in which we made a very similar point with respect to the role of culture
> in human development. Simplifying brutally, we argued that new technologies
> entail changes in social relations that subsequently change the environment
> of development for the en-culturating organism. This formulation, we
> suggested provided piagetians  to reconcile contradictions between the
> biological and the social sides of Piaget.
>
> The similarity of the arguments raises a question for me about principles
> of development that appear non-accidently related at different levels of
> analysis:
> 'individual organism, individual organism as constituitive of a social
> group, the institutional structure of the organism's environment, the
> structure of that proximal society and its relation to the organization of
> the species of which it is a part. Does some sort of "orthogenetic
> principle" apply across different scales of social processes?
>
> Short of that, what are we to make of the "limited" differences we see in
> the dynamics of different levels of the system in relative sychrony,
> perhaps a crisis, perhaps an opportunity?
>
> David has been point toward a sociology and linguistics to bring together
> various apparently combinable mode of theorizing a CHAT account of
> development that generalizes across scales (themselves differentially
> mutable from the perspective of a single human organism). This work, and
> that part of Yrjo's work focused on organisms seems to be pointing in
> similarly directions. If that it correct, it extends the links to the study
> of social institutions, a topic currently of general interest in the CHAT
> community.
>
> In any events, thanks.
>
> mike
>
> On Sat, Aug 19, 2017 at 6:52 AM, Zlatko Bodrozic <bodrozic@web.de> wrote:
>
>> Dear colleagues,
>>
>> some of you might find our paper (co-authored with Paul Adler) on the
>> historical evolution of management models and organizational paradigms
>> interesting. We published it this year in Administrative Science Quarterly.
>> While it is based on a Neo-Schumpeterian framework (Schumpeter, Freeman,
>> Perez),  it was equally informed by cultural-historical activity theory.
>> You can download a copy by using the link below, and we would be delighted
>> to get any reactions to it that you might share with us.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>> Zlatko Bodrožić and Paul Adler
>>
>> Bodrozic, Z., and P.S. Adler (forthcoming) The Evolution of Management
>> Models: A Neo-Schumpeterian Theory. /Administrative Science Quarterly/
>> Download <http://www-bcf.usc.edu/%7Epadler/research/models.pdf>
>>
>>
>>

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------
Dr. Zlatko Bodrožić

Email: bodrozic@web.de
Tel.:  +381-62-1769594
Tel.:  +49-172-4712341

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Fig A1 portrait.pdf
Type: application/download
Size: 227409 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l/attachments/20170820/cb34880c/attachment.bin