The predominance of epistemology as the quintessential mechanism to promote, foster and generate knowledge within the framework of contributing to the social, economic, cultural, political, environmental and intellectual development of scientific thought; It is conceived as the science that deals with genesis and its justification for understanding the wonders that deal with the behavior of humanity in an environment of uncertainty and constant transformations in societies.
In this sense, this science that originates the creation of knowledge through observing phenomena in the industrial, business, commercial-organizational world, in a space with high levels of uncertainty and volatility, impacted by the incessant and strongly discussed, debated and implacable globalization process, as stated by Dr. Madera in the talk about complexity, a paradigm for change in 2008 "… we are children of globalization", forged cause at the end of the 20th century as a result of the fall of the Berlin Wall, which showed the implosion of the Soviet Union in 1991; being perfected and debated to this day; where the factors of disorder, chaos and dilemma are situations that require epistemology to give answers.
In this context, we find a new science model, the complexity that shows the principle of self-organization and self-regulation of business sectors, which manifests chaotic and disorderly situations and as an epicenter to attack it we have order as an emerging apex to overcome organizational conflicts.
The complexity represents the reality of knowledge, with the ability to investigate, explain and describe the subjects and phenomena under study to materialize their understanding, which fosters verifiable and verifiable solutions, giving timely responses to society and consequently generating a significant contribution to performance. of modern scientific thought.
For Navarro 1996, quoted by Velilla (2002), he expresses that "the complexity that we observe in the real world is the result of the action of mechanisms that can be described by means of formal theories". (p.11). In other words, science from its conception is endless and inexhaustible as the ideas that surround the human being with the histrionic ability to think, create, know, observe, write and conclude on real findings.
Graph N ° 1. Pioneers of Complex Thought
Note: graphed by the Author. Data taken from Velilla (2002).
In the previous graph, behavior is observed through the history of researchers who approached complex thinking from different perspectives, where these authors laid the foundations of current proposals for the complex, their positions addressed the task of the complexification of the sciences, of trends and knowledge in a global context, in order to link it with order, the universal and the regular, such as disorder, the particular and events.
For his part, Morín 1983, quoted by Velilla (2002), expressed that:
The only thing substantively complex is reality itself, which overflows thought and of which we cannot have any direct, but phenomenal knowledge. It proposes a "method", as an articulating or self-building path of knowledge towards "complex thinking". A self-organization of knowledge that links the unrelated, called "complex thinking" not because it is really complex, but because it is oriented towards the complex and never tries to reduce it. Or in other words "an anti-method in which ignorance, uncertainty, and confusion become virtues", in precursor signs of complexity. (p.19).
On the basis of what Morín describes, the essential foundation of complexity holds that the real world is where the necessary methods must be applied to face circumstances with confusing, complicated and convulsed characteristics within this scenario of uncertainty, with the firm purpose of giving effective and serious solutions.
Now, when we link the epistemological and scientific thought currents in the managerial area, we observe an infinite range of approaches developed from the 17th century to our times, which have marked the leadership of public and private organizations, influenced by societies of different types.: industrialists, capitalists, second wave, bureaucratic or disciplinary, which undoubtedly registered the bases of the evolution of administrative thought. For example, Foirtune and López (1994) stated that “… if we understand it as the hegemony of the military institution, which managed to impose - in dispute with other institutions such as the partisan institution - its own organizational morphology…” (p.1).
The above approach allows it to be related to the operation of the vast majority of Venezuelan public sector institutions during the first decade of the 21st century up to our time, with a strong direct influence of militarism in Ministerial-type organizations such as: Commerce, Electric Power, Food, Public Banking, among others, which clearly reflects that the military is controlling twenty-five percent (25%) of the executive cabinet with a pronounced power.
This mixed influence between civilians and military personnel, had its origin in the twilight of the 20th century, when a civic-military rebellion commanded by Ex-President Chávez with a group of military personnel, attempted to give a coup d'etat to the constitutionally elected government of the Republic from Venezuela in 1992, which was not successful. However, these characters a few years later came to power through direct and secret popular vote, outlining a type of militaristic government, which has had a strong presence in the bureaucratic structure of the state, demonstrating how Rusell Robb described it in a conference on industrial organizations, dictated at Harvard Business School, would indicate "the influence of the military institution on the organizational models that Smith and Taylor had observed".
Likewise, the conception and use of the term staff; In the country's public institutions, it has been progressively coined to create and increase the growth of the bureaucratic structure of the state administration, in a context of uncertainty and economic and social upheaval, for example: General Staff of the Great Housing Mission, General Staff for Health against Dengue and Chikungunya; General Staff of Agricultural Roads, General Staff of Communication among others; what promotes a model of hierarchical organizational structure of command and control of military court; expressed by Romero 1986, cited by Velilla (2002) as:
The partisan institution succumbed to the process of militarization, when in 1902 - under the imperative of the process of bureaucratization in the West - Lenin, taking the ideas of Clausewitz and forced by the force of events, ended up imposing on the party a military structure: centralized, hierarchical -pyramidal, disciplinary. (p.3).
In effect, we are witnessing the application of control mechanisms and structures used by the strongest totalitarian and authoritarian governments of the 20th century, placing in this society as retrograde and orthodox practices. However, these practices have their epistemological floor in the form of an order of power of the organizations of the military sector over the other powers that coexist in the nation-state.
Another example of this influence was what arose in 1938 in Spain from Generalissimo Francisco Franco, military man and dictator, where he embodied not only the military power but also the power of the ecclesiastical institution, mixing religion with political ideology, leading to the exercise of his hegemony and mandate for thirty-five (35) years with the support of the Catholic Church.
Finally, these individualistic appreciations and positions seek to link what has happened for many decades at different times loads of various events that have opened the window to promote knowledge; More recently, Morín cited by Rodríguez and Aguirre (2011), defines that “… complex thinking consists of an epistemological rethinking that leads to a new organization of knowledge, both personally and socially or institutionally”. (p.11).
Consequently, the essence of complex thinking is man's search to relate them to open systems of a social, personal and environmental nature, to understand the conceptions that the human being has about himself and his surroundings, it is a task Apotheosis, if we look at it from the genesis of its existence, there the benefits of the theories of complexities offer us some ways to investigate it in an organizational, managerial, institutional and social environment; Thus contributing to create new approaches oriented to evolve.
References
- Foirtune, W and López, F. (1994). Problems of Managerial Thinking in Postmodern Societies or how the physical world "evaporates" (notes to destabilize modern thought systems). Wood, I. (2008). Discussion on Complexity a Paradigm for Change. Available: https://www.youtube.com. Consultation: 2014, October 6. Rodríguez, L and Aguirre, J. (2011). Complexity Theories and Social Sciences: New Epistemological and Methodological Strategies. Nomads, Scientific Journal of Social and Legal Sciences. Complutense University of Madrid. Spain. Yacambú University, Vice-Rector's Office for Research and Postgraduate (2007). Norms for the Preparation and presentation of the Special Works of Degree, Works of Degree and Doctoral Theses of the UNY. Barquisimeto.
