Organizations as we know them today have their origin in the Industrial Revolution. This movement caused a series of structural changes in the society of the eighteenth century due to the inventions of the machines that would lead to mass production and therefore the beginning of worker-employer relations.
Likewise, the machining of production generated competition between manufacturers, which in turn would force critical thinkers within these institutions to think about what to do to solve the problems that organizations presented in order to confront their peers. This situation is what has allowed the advancement of scientific knowledge that seeks to understand, explain and predict the organizations which have become the object of study of these scientists.
As time goes by, ideas evolve, which at present point to the study of the thinking man within the workplace because it has already been discovered that the proper treatment of people leads them to give ideas and work cooperatively and in turn this situation becomes an organizational competitive advantage.
Nowadays, the idea of recognizing that problems are solved by creative and critical people who perceive risky situations as a source of inspiration is becoming stronger and stronger. Likewise, it is also recognized that knowledge, strength, perseverance and a lot of imagination are required to understand, explain and seek solutions to the problematic and challenging situations that institutions present to be able to survive in an extremely complex and competitive world such as the 21st century. The value of knowledge arising from experience is recognized as much as that emanating from the study, that is why today the ability of people to analyze is valued as the source of construction of creative solutions that originate in the collection of data of the institution,the environment and theoretical knowledge generated by organizational thinkers during the twentieth century.
Many managers make the mistake of seeing administrative principles and concepts as recipes that do not require scientific thinking and imagination to seek novel solutions to the problems of the organizational world. In this regard, Hamel (2006) says that any problem that is widespread, persistent or unprecedented will probably not be solved with second-hand principles.
Although the principles of the administrative process have been a guide for modern practice, it is not sufficient to cope with the modern organizational world. It is important for those who direct and make strategic decisions to understand that today's world is a world of turbulence where change is the only constant and also to keep in mind that supply is greater than demand. For this reason, scientific and creative thinking are fundamental for the search for new theoretical principles emanating from innovative administrative practices that lead to problem solving. In this regard, Hamel (2006) comments that variety is an essential principle of adaptability and recommends that more decision-making power be given to the people who make up the institutions.
These novel ideas have been tested by some institutions that have verified the veracity of them. For example, the institution of Great place to work (www.greatplacetowork.com.mx) has generated a work methodology emanating from 20 years of research in different organizations around the world. Through this study, it was discovered that trust between managers and employees is the most defined characteristic of the best work environments, therefore the definition of an excellent work environment for this institution is the following: «you can trust the people you work for, you take pride in what you do and enjoy the people you work with.
Currently, this institution advises several institutions in order to increase efficiency and effectiveness through generating work environments where the value of the human being as a generator of wealth is rescued by enriching the links between employees and managers, between employees. and your institution and among the employees themselves.
In the modern organizational world it has been discovered that it is important to promote and adopt as fundamental principles of managerial action delegation and activism. According to these ideas as pillars of administrative action, it is observed that avant-garde institutions have implemented policies and procedures based on a philosophy where people are capital and this is generated by the opportunity given to the employees of be heard as well as that they listen to others with the purpose of generating ideas and enriching it through dialogue. In this regard, Pierre Lèvy comments that collective intelligence is based on a very simple principle: everyone knows something and what it is about is (…) to guarantee everyone's access to sources of information. Each human being is for another a source of knowledge.
Although the beginning of scientific administration is closely linked to factories, it is currently recognized that every organization is subject to being studied in order to understand its internal dynamics and how it is affected by the political, cultural, and economic environment. Understanding an organization is closely linked to how the people who make up the institutions are and the use made of power, money, machinery, instruments, buildings, information, computer equipment and of course the type of organizational structure depends on it.. In this regard, Christensen and Raynor (2003) recommend that we must know not only where, when and why things should change, but also what should remain the same.
According to the aforementioned, it is inferred that it is the human being who makes the difference between one institution and another, therefore, organizations are human creations that can be works of art due to their technique, harmony and creativity or a set of people working disjointedly and being unaware of their clumsiness and inefficiency due to being improperly directed by thoughtless people with little knowledge of administrative theoretical principles and environmental trends.
According to Sánchez Cabrera's doctoral thesis in) we find that the ability to cooperate is already being recognized by economics scholars as an indispensable factor for organizational success, since a supportive economic model is supported by cooperation, which as Economic category is linked to the development of human activity because it is inherent in the character of social being that identifies man. In this thesis we find the argument of the Chilean economist Luis Razeto regarding what he calls factor c. The name of factor c is due to the fact that with “c” words that refer to cooperation begin in many languages: Collaboration, community, sharing, companionship. And the prefix "co" contains the idea of being together, of being with the other, of doing something together.
The current trend is to free people to enhance their ability to create ideas and share them. Some success stories about believing in activism and delegation (which require cooperation) are Toyota, Southwest Airlines, Microsoft, Cemex, and Bimbo. Senior executives at Google focus on creating organizational environments where googlyphs unleash their creative potential and think and work on whatever they feel will benefit Google users and advertisers. John Mackey, the CEO of Whole Foods says his goal was "to create an organization based on love instead of fear." He has understood that it is small teams that manage departments such as fresh vegetables, prepared foods and sea products.Executives consult with teams on all decisions involving stores and delegate them the ability to decide on issues such as which products to sell, as well as allowing them to veto new hires. In Toyota, a philosophy is lived where people are people and they are believed in, for example front-line employees are allowed to give their opinion and give solutions to problems, for this they are given the skills, tools and permission to solve and avoid new problems. At Southwest Airlines, high performance relationships are built and maintained between executives, employees, unions and suppliers who share goals,knowledge and mutual respect that leads them to solve problems by working together quickly by providing continuous and mutual support that makes them intelligent people.
At this point it is important to clarify that the word intelligence comes from the Latin «intelligentia», which means «between linking», that is, to unite, unite again or relate. According to the aforementioned, it is inferred that intelligence is in the connection capacity of the different cells that make up the company, therefore it is important that the social systems of the organizations are connected and can share information that helps them analyze their situation in a global and particular way to make better decisions. Those social systems are made up of employees, but there are also suppliers, owners, and customers. In short, all those who have some link with the organization.
Porras, Emery and Thompson (2006) mention that lasting success is achieved in those institutions that train for personal growth and the career towards a triumph firmly established in discovering what matters to people and gives meaning to their daily lives. Success comes in life and at work when people have meaning in their life, a situation that allows them to become passionate and thus feel love for their work that will result in a better effort characterized by a greater number of attempts, quick actions and ideas stimulants. Secondly, it is required to have a creative way of thinking that will lead you to trust and believe in your ideas, these people when they face adversity can quickly go from a negative emotion to a constructive action, therefore,they make the best possible use of problems and continue their march because mistakes are perceived as opportunities to understand what happened and overcome it. Third, they put their ideas into motion and continually seek to correct and improve them as they have a love for what they do and a deep sense of creating the life that brings them joy. All these aforementioned factors are what the institutions that have or want success seek to promote through training and development programs.All these aforementioned factors are what the institutions that have or want success seek to promote through training and development programs.All these aforementioned factors are what the institutions that have or want success seek to promote through training and development programs.
Evans and Wolf (2005), through studying the success of Linux and Toyota, come to the conclusion that collaboration is an empire where great group efforts are the product of environments designed to produce abundant and cheap transactions product of the cooperation that crosses organizational barriers. These authors also mention that organizational psychologists have found that monetary carrots and accountability clubs motivate people to perform narrow and specific tasks, but generally discourage them from going beyond them. Admiration and applause are much more effective stimuli for more entrepreneurial behavior.
According to what has been said, it is important to know that the right people for the position do not require excessive control, which curiously leads to more control and less productivity. If you have committed people it is important to trust them and let them do their job. In this regard, Ericsson and Gratton (2007) comment, companies that identify their potential employees as methodically as their potential customers can obtain a sustainable advantage in the market. At JetBlue, employees have unlimited privileges to change shifts, which they can negotiate through an online community forum. This self-organizing process keeps employees motivated and satisfied.
Likewise, organizations that rely on trust as the basis of their organizational philosophy do not promote hierarchical or elitist structures; if they do not insist on creating environments where people are aware that no one is more important than another. Hill (2007) mentions that those bosses who achieve some degree of control achieve a false victory. Obedience is not the same as commitment. If people are not committed, they will not take the initiative. And if subordinates don't take the initiative, your boss can't delegate effectively. Subordinates would not take the risks that lead to change and continuous improvement that today's turbulent organizational environment demands.
In conclusion, it is inferred that the current trend to achieve success is to stop controlling how it was done in the past, but rather to exercise authority with people and take advantage of their creative and analytical potential by freeing their mind and heart, but To achieve this situation, it is necessary to put aside unequal relationships and begin to believe that people make a difference. In other words, it is necessary to work to form a corporate culture based on the value of cooperation in which workers, departments, sub-managers, the different companies of a company feel others as essential to achieve the strategic objectives emanating from The mission of the company.For the mission to be fulfilled and the strategic objectives to be achieved, it is necessary from them to establish departmental and tactical objectives that in turn rescue individual objectives. This strategy based on cooperation is translated into roles, activities and responsibilities that each member will assume with the firm intention of benefiting and benefiting others. In other words, each of the parts that make up the whole recognizes the degree of affectation that the fulfillment of their duty produces in the others and in turn also recognizes that fulfilling properly is one of the fundamental sources to maintain positive interactions. It is precisely this fact that the institutions that base their wealth on the value of cooperation recognize.
Bibliography
Baker, Greenberg and Hemingway. Leader Summaries (2006). Authorized abstract from: What Happy Companies Know by Prentice Hall 2006
Christensen, Clayton and Raynor, Michael (2003). Why pragmatic executives should consider management theory. Harvard Business Review. September
Ericsson, Tamara and Gratton, Lynda (2007). What does it mean to work here? Harvard Business Review. March p78-86
Evans Philip and Wolf Bob (2005). The Empire of Collaboration in Harvard Business Review. July p3-10
Hamel Gary (2006). The why, what and how of management innovation. Harvard Business Review. February p.62-75
Hill, Linda (2007) Becoming the boss at Harvard Business Review. January p.41-49
Hoffer Gittell (2004) Leader Summaries. Authorized summary from: The Southwest Airlines Way: Using the power of relationships to achieve high performance, McGraw-Hill Trade 2003.
Porras, Jerry and Thompson Emery (2006) Leader Summaries. Authorized abstract from: Success Built to last Thompson, Wharthon Scholl Publishing 2006
Sánchez Cabrera, Álvaro (2006) Critical analysis of the organizational structure in OFCC. Economic management, financial management and administrative approaches in social organizations: A study in the light of organization theory (1980-2000) Doctoral thesis accessible in full text in.
