THE EVOLUTION OF ORGANIZATIONAL MANAGEMENT THROUGH SHIFTING PARADIGMS
Abstract
Management paradigms have evolved alongside the development of change management, each responding to organizational challenges in adapting to new realities. Thomas Kuhn’s theory of paradigm shifts offers a conceptual framework to understand these transitions, where dominant approaches persist until anomalies provoke revolutionary changes. This perspective is particularly relevant in today’s dynamic environments shaped by globalization and technological advancement. Purpose. This study explores the evolution of management paradigms within the context of change management, applying Kuhn’s framework to analyze their progression. It evaluates contributions from key thinkers – Frederick Taylor, Henri Fayol, Elton Mayo, Douglas McGregor, and W. Edwards Deming – emphasizing the growing importance of Paradoxical Thinking as a framework for managing complexity and uncertainty. Special focus is placed on the IT sector, where adaptability is crucial for driving successful change. Materials and Methods. The study applies Kuhn’s paradigm shift theory to trace the historical development of management thought. Foundational works are analyzed to evaluate each paradigm’s contributions to change management practices, identifying achievements and exposing limitations. Results. Management paradigms, from Scientific Management to Agile Methodologies, introduced innovative approaches to organizational challenges but revealed inherent shortcomings. Scientific Management optimized efficiency but neglected human dynamics, leading to subsequent paradigms like Administrative Management and the Human Relations Movement. Systems Thinking and Lean Management later emphasized adaptability but left unresolved tensions. Paradoxical Thinking and Polarity Management represent a culmination of this evolution, providing effective approach to navigate inherent contradictions and drive innovation in organizational change. Prospects. Paradoxical Thinking enables organizations to transform tensions into opportunities for innovation and sustainable adaptability. By balancing competing priorities, it equips organizations to excel in environments of rapid and constant change, particularly in IT sectors.
References
Barnard C. I. (1938). The Functions of the Executive. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Beck K., Beedle M., van Bennekum A., Cockburn A., Cunningham W., Fowler M., et al. (2001). Manifesto for Agile Software Development. Agile Alliance. Available at: https://agilemanifesto.org/ (Accessed 18 November 2024)
Beisser A. (1970). The paradoxical theory of change. In: Fagan J. and Shepherd I. L. (eds.) Gestalt Therapy Now: Theory, Techniques, Applications. New York, NY: Harper & Row, pp. 77–80.
Bertalanffy L. von. (1968). General System Theory: Foundations, Development, Applications. New York: George Braziller.
Brughmans I. (2023). Paradoxical Leadership: How to Make Complexity an Advantage. London: Kogan Page.
Deming W. E. (1986). Out of the Crisis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Fayol H., 1949. General and Industrial Management. London, UK: Pitman Publishing.
Follett M. P. (1926). The giving of orders. In: Metcalf, H. C. (ed.) Scientific Foundations of Business Administration. Baltimore: The Williams & Wilkins Company, pp. 224–237.
Graham P. (ed.) (1995). Mary Parker Follett: Prophet of Management. Boston MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Herzberg F. (1959). The Motivation to Work. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
Johnson B. (1992). Polarity Management: Identifying and Managing Unsolvable Problems. Columbus, OH: HRD Press.
Kuhn T. S. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Lawrence P. R. and Lorsch J. W. (1967). Organization and Environment: Managing Differentiation and Integration. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Lewis M. W. and Smith W. K. (2011). Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Academy of Management Review, 36(2), pp. 381–403. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2009.0223
Lewis M. W., Smith W. K. (2014). Paradox as a metatheoretical perspective: Sharpening the focus and widening the scope. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 51(2), pp. 127–149. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886314522322
Locke E. A. (1982). The ideas of Frederick W. Taylor: An evaluation. Academy of Management Review, 7(1), pp. 14–24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/257244
Maslow A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), pp. 370–396. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/h0054346
Mayo E. (1933). The Human Problems of an Industrial Civilization. New York, NY: Macmillan.
McGregor D. (1960). The Human Side of Enterprise. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Ohno T. (1988). Toyota Production System: Beyond Large-Scale Production. Portland, OR: Productivity Press.
Rigby. D. K., Sutherland J., Takeuchi H. (2016). Embracing agile. Harvard Business Review, 94(5), pp. 40–50. Available at: https://hbr.org/2016/05/embracing-agile (Accessed 18 November 2024)
Roethlisberger F. J. and Dickson W. J. (1939). Management and the Worker. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.
Scott W. R., (1981). Organizations: Rational, Natural, and Open Systems. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Shingo S. (1989). A Study of the Toyota Production System from an Industrial Engineering Viewpoint. Portland, OR: Productivity Press.
Smith W. K., Lewis M. W. (2014). Leadership skills for managing paradoxes. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 7(2), pp. 224–231. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-9434.2012.01435.x
Smith W. K. and Lewis M. W. (2022). Both/And Thinking: Embracing Creative Tensions to Solve Your Toughest Problems. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.
Taylor F. W. (1911). The Principles of Scientific Management. New York, NY: Harper & Brothers.
Wren D. A. (1994). The Evolution of Management Thought. 4th ed. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
Zhang Y., Waldman D. A., Han Y. and Li X. (2015). Paradoxical leader behaviors in people management: Antecedents and consequences. Academy of Management Journal, 58(2), pp. 538–566. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2012.0995
