English
¿Renovación de la teoría de la organización? Sí, gracias962
Publicado:
jul 1, 2015
Palabras clave:
Organización, renovación
Contenido principal del artículo
Resumen
La teoría de la organización (TO) requiere un esfuerzo de renovación para ofrecer una respuesta más robusta a la realidad de las organizaciones en este primer cuarto del siglo XXI. Las teorías de la organización tal como están planteadas no ofrecen una visión holística de la organización ni aportan una respuesta robusta y actualizada. Integrar las teorías en torno a un cuerpo más unificado, modernizar las teorías y paradigmas relevantes a las nuevas corrientes de pensamiento y desarrollar nuevas teorías, son algunos de los retos principales. Muchas de las teorías de la organización no se han actualizado adecuadamente o no están en condiciones de hacerlo, además muchas de las teorías no responden satisfactoriamente al conjunto de los elementos fundamentales de una organización: entidad, gobierno y contexto. Las reflexiones planteadas en este documento pretenden ofrecer una pauta para desarrollar teorías más originales y radicales en la TO.
Descargas
Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.
Detalles del artículo
Cómo citar
Cabanelas Omil, J. (2015). ¿Renovación de la teoría de la organización? Sí, gracias. Revista Del Centro De Investigación De La Universidad La Salle, 11(44), 11–30. https://doi.org/10.26457/recein.v11i44.822
Sección
Artículos
Esta revista se encuentra bajo la licencia de Creative Commons, por tanto, los autores, al postular su artículo, lo adhieren a dicha licencia.
El autor puede disponer de su artículo para su archivo en repositorios institucionales o en páginas web personales, con la referencia y agradecimientos a la fuente donde se ha publicado.
El autor puede disponer de su artículo para su archivo en repositorios institucionales o en páginas web personales, con la referencia y agradecimientos a la fuente donde se ha publicado.
Citas
Astley, W. G. (1985). Administrative science as socially constructed truth. Administrative Science Quarterly, 497-513.
Bakken, T., & Hernes, T. (2006). Organizing is both a verb and a noun: Weick meets Whitehead. Organization Studies, 27(11), 1599-1616.
Birkinshaw, J., Hamel, G., & Mol, M. J. (2008). Management innovation.Academy of management Review, 33(4), 825-845.
Cannella, A. A., & Paetzold, R. L. (1994). Pfeffer's barriers to the advance of organizational science: A rejoinder. Academy of Management Review, 19(2), 331-341.
Corley, K. G., & Gioia, D. A. (2011). Building theory about theory building: what constitutes a theoretical contribution?. Academy of Management Review, 36(1), 12-32.
Daft, R. L., & Lewin, A. Y. (1990). Can organization studies begin to break out of the normal science straitjacket? An editorial essay. Organization Science, 1(1), 1-9.
Davenport, T. H., Prusak, L., & Wilson, H. J. (2003). What's the big idea?: Creating and capitalizing on the best management thinking. Harvard Business Press.
Diccionario de Real Academia de la Lengua Española: http://buscon.rae.es/draeI/ Extraído el 14.07.2011
Diccionario Oxford: http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/organization Extraído el 14.07.2011
Diccionario Chino Mandarín-Piyin-Inglés:
http://www.mandarintools.com/cgi-bin/wordlook.pl?word=organization&searchtype=chinese&where=whole&audio=on
Diccionario Merriam-Webster: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/organization. Extraído el 14.07.2011
Evans, V. (2005). The meaning of time: polysemy, the lexicon and conceptual structure. Journal of linguistics, 41(01), 33-75.
Fauconnier, G. (1994), Mental Spaces, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Fauconnier, G. (1997), Mappings in Thought and Language, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M. (2008). The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind's hidden complexities. Basic Books.
Gergen, K. J., & Thatchenkery, T. J. (1996). Organization science as social construction: Postmodern potentials. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 32(4), 356-377.
Hinings, B., & Greenwood, R. (1988). The normative prescription of organizations. Institutional patterns and organizations: Culture and environment, 53, 70.
Lakoff, G. (1990). Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things. What categories reveal about the mind, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago. 114
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1981). Metaphors We Live By. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1999). Phylosophy in The Flesh. The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought, Basic Books, New York
McKelvey, B. (1999). Avoiding complexity catastrophe in coevolutionary pockets: Strategies for rugged landscapes. Organization Science, 10(3), 294-321.
Oliver, C. (1997). Sustainable competitive advantage: Combining institutional and resource-based views. Strategic management journal, 18(9), 697-713.
Oswick, C., Fleming, P., & Hanlon, G. (2011). From borrowing to blending: rethinking the processes of organizational theory building.
Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 318-337.
Pfeffer, J. (2007). A modest proposal: How we might change the process and product of managerial research. Academy of Management Journal, 50(6), 1334-1345.
Pfeffer, J., & Fong, C. T. (2002). The end of business schools? Less success than meets the eye. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 1(1), 78-95.
Rynes, S. L. (2007). Editor's Afterword Let's Create A Tipping Point: What Academics and Practitioners can do, Alone and Together. Academy of Management Journal, 50(5), 1046-1054.
Sandberg, J., & Tsoukas, H. (2015). Making sense of the sensemaking perspective: Its constituents, limitations, and opportunities for further development. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36(S1), S6-S32.
Suddaby, R.; Hardy, C.; Huy, Q. N.; (2011), Where are the new theories of organization, p. 244, Academy of Management Review; Apr2011, vol. 36, núm. 2
Sutton, R. I., & Staw, B. M. (1995). What theory is not. Administrative science quarterly, 371-384.
Turcotte, D. L., & Rundle, J. B. (2002). Self-organized complexity in the physical, biological, and social sciences. Proceedings of the National Academy of sciences, 99 (suppl 1), 2463-2465
Thompson, M. (2011). Ontological shift or ontological drift? Reality claims, epistemological frameworks, and theory generation in organization studies. Academy of Management Review, 36(4), 754-773.
Vitali, S., Glattfelder, J. B., & Battiston, S. (2011). The network of global corporate control. PLoS ONE 6 (10): e25995. doi: 10.1371 / journal.pone.0025995
Bakken, T., & Hernes, T. (2006). Organizing is both a verb and a noun: Weick meets Whitehead. Organization Studies, 27(11), 1599-1616.
Birkinshaw, J., Hamel, G., & Mol, M. J. (2008). Management innovation.Academy of management Review, 33(4), 825-845.
Cannella, A. A., & Paetzold, R. L. (1994). Pfeffer's barriers to the advance of organizational science: A rejoinder. Academy of Management Review, 19(2), 331-341.
Corley, K. G., & Gioia, D. A. (2011). Building theory about theory building: what constitutes a theoretical contribution?. Academy of Management Review, 36(1), 12-32.
Daft, R. L., & Lewin, A. Y. (1990). Can organization studies begin to break out of the normal science straitjacket? An editorial essay. Organization Science, 1(1), 1-9.
Davenport, T. H., Prusak, L., & Wilson, H. J. (2003). What's the big idea?: Creating and capitalizing on the best management thinking. Harvard Business Press.
Diccionario de Real Academia de la Lengua Española: http://buscon.rae.es/draeI/ Extraído el 14.07.2011
Diccionario Oxford: http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/organization Extraído el 14.07.2011
Diccionario Chino Mandarín-Piyin-Inglés:
http://www.mandarintools.com/cgi-bin/wordlook.pl?word=organization&searchtype=chinese&where=whole&audio=on
Diccionario Merriam-Webster: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/organization. Extraído el 14.07.2011
Evans, V. (2005). The meaning of time: polysemy, the lexicon and conceptual structure. Journal of linguistics, 41(01), 33-75.
Fauconnier, G. (1994), Mental Spaces, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Fauconnier, G. (1997), Mappings in Thought and Language, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M. (2008). The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind's hidden complexities. Basic Books.
Gergen, K. J., & Thatchenkery, T. J. (1996). Organization science as social construction: Postmodern potentials. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 32(4), 356-377.
Hinings, B., & Greenwood, R. (1988). The normative prescription of organizations. Institutional patterns and organizations: Culture and environment, 53, 70.
Lakoff, G. (1990). Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things. What categories reveal about the mind, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago. 114
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1981). Metaphors We Live By. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1999). Phylosophy in The Flesh. The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought, Basic Books, New York
McKelvey, B. (1999). Avoiding complexity catastrophe in coevolutionary pockets: Strategies for rugged landscapes. Organization Science, 10(3), 294-321.
Oliver, C. (1997). Sustainable competitive advantage: Combining institutional and resource-based views. Strategic management journal, 18(9), 697-713.
Oswick, C., Fleming, P., & Hanlon, G. (2011). From borrowing to blending: rethinking the processes of organizational theory building.
Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 318-337.
Pfeffer, J. (2007). A modest proposal: How we might change the process and product of managerial research. Academy of Management Journal, 50(6), 1334-1345.
Pfeffer, J., & Fong, C. T. (2002). The end of business schools? Less success than meets the eye. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 1(1), 78-95.
Rynes, S. L. (2007). Editor's Afterword Let's Create A Tipping Point: What Academics and Practitioners can do, Alone and Together. Academy of Management Journal, 50(5), 1046-1054.
Sandberg, J., & Tsoukas, H. (2015). Making sense of the sensemaking perspective: Its constituents, limitations, and opportunities for further development. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36(S1), S6-S32.
Suddaby, R.; Hardy, C.; Huy, Q. N.; (2011), Where are the new theories of organization, p. 244, Academy of Management Review; Apr2011, vol. 36, núm. 2
Sutton, R. I., & Staw, B. M. (1995). What theory is not. Administrative science quarterly, 371-384.
Turcotte, D. L., & Rundle, J. B. (2002). Self-organized complexity in the physical, biological, and social sciences. Proceedings of the National Academy of sciences, 99 (suppl 1), 2463-2465
Thompson, M. (2011). Ontological shift or ontological drift? Reality claims, epistemological frameworks, and theory generation in organization studies. Academy of Management Review, 36(4), 754-773.
Vitali, S., Glattfelder, J. B., & Battiston, S. (2011). The network of global corporate control. PLoS ONE 6 (10): e25995. doi: 10.1371 / journal.pone.0025995