The second half of the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st century have been marked by a vertiginous development of the sciences, by new and complex technological processes, without a doubt, computerization, information and communication technologies (ICTs), have created a new perspective on human relationships and require forms of organization that are capable of responding to the new demands that arise from the changing environment. This raises a set of questions as to how organizations (OD) should develop, what should be developed, how to do it, what is the cardinal objective, what are the fundamental resources.
In the present work, a set of reflections on the matter are exposed, taking as a guiding thread the organizational culture, and as a "typical" organization the school in particular at its higher level (university) to focus the point of view of the authors in this regard.
Development
Today's world is characterized by an impressive rate in the change of its conditions of existence, which are influenced by the appearance of different dimensions in the analysis of economic, political, cultural, social, psychological, etc.
Substantially modifying the communication system, trade mechanisms, the international financial system and the economic role of transnational corporations; emerging increasingly, new technologies, new markets, new businesses. All of this describes society at the beginning of the 21st century, which is constantly restructuring and diversifying.
Considering that the human being, in his social character has developed from interaction, discovering in coordinated work the possibility of satisfying his needs, guaranteeing his subsistence, he has gradually built a world of organizations, and historically they have had different forms: think in human relations, in social activities, in everyday life in general, it is to think of organizations, because they are the fundamental link for the maintenance and development of any society.
Thus, it is easy to understand the interest that the definition and study of organizations, their main characteristics, functions, the principles that govern their development, etc. Although it is not possible to speak of a consensus between the different positions taken on this phenomenon, at present the concept of understanding them as cultures is widely spread, which implies observing them as a form of expression and manifestation of human consciousness, so that, transcending the perspectives of economic studies, their subjective, ideological, symbolic aspects are focused, as well as their imaginary component, built by man, this in accordance with their needs in a social historical moment.
In this sense, the theoretical-methodological conception held by Edgar Schein (1985) is paradigmatic, who explains organizational culture as “the set of basic assumptions that a group creates, discovers and develops in the learning process of how to deal with problems of external and internal adaptation and that work at least well enough so that they are considered valid and taught to the members as a correct way of perceiving, thinking and feeling in relation to these problems. It recognizes different levels in it, which it defines as: level of visible artifacts, level of values and level of basic underlying assumptions.
These levels have a hierarchical nature and are closely articulated, so that by modifying one of them, changes should be produced progressively in the others: when changes appear in the artifacts, the values are modified and in the longer term the assumptions can be modified. This process can also be generated in the opposite direction, although, in general, the most "superficial" ones are the most dynamic.
This conception of organizations does not imply a total break with previous definitions, nor does it prevent the recognition of the importance of economic elements in their study; In fact, the author himself defines as distinctive elements in organizations: the rational coordination of efforts, the achievement or achievement of some common objectives or purposes through the coordination of activities, the division of labor and the need for hierarchical authority, which is generally incorporated into a complex hierarchy of positions or ranks, which tend to define an area of responsibility.
The key to conceiving organizations as cultures is not, as indicated above, in denying that it involves elements of a pragmatic order, even of a formal, material nature; does not deny the recognition of the results and economic determinants of human activity, but rather highlights the analysis of other processes: wealth in the production of individual and group imaginaries (proposed basically as values and assumptions), which are also products of the activity organizational and are in turn their own determinants.
Education, like the economy, health, sports and, in general, the most important areas of human activity, are carried out in an organized, coordinated and intentional way. Hence, there are different types of organizations, depending on the particularities of their missions, their social mandate: productive, social, educational organizations, among others.
In a general sense, educational organizations have been characterized (regardless of the level of education in which they specialize) for acting as scenarios that ensure order and reproduction of the social systems in which they are immersed. Although every type of organization in a society largely reproduces the culture to which it belongs: the socially shared norms, values and assumptions; the educational one has historically had this activity as its fundamental mission, its social order, the object that justifies its existence.
The school organization is the space of socialization that works with the knowledge that society requires to consolidate itself over time, although it cannot be considered that this is a passive, linear reproduction, free of crisis: we must bear in mind that the school itself is a historical construction aimed at solving the problem of cultural transmission to new generations, so that it also reflects and breeds many of the changes or breaking points of the social order: it is reproductive and in turn producer of culture, educator par excellence of the members of any society, that has been and is its mission, regardless of the specific ways it takes to achieve it.
Another characteristic that has traditionally identified these organizations, and that largely guided their emergence, is their relationship with knowledge: the social recognition of the school (the most widespread meaning for educational organizations) as the most legitimate institution for the transmission of knowledge, that even the state tries to validate more than other spaces that can fulfill similar functions, such as the family, the church, etc. This particularity marked, to some extent, the representation of educational organizations as somewhat closed spaces, less dynamic with respect to others in society, a situation easy to appreciate even in the physical characteristics that typify these institutions (schools have traditionally been somewhat closed, isolated centers).
This representation has evolved, since they unfold before a reality that, according to Margulies and Raia (1974), is identified by the accelerated rhythm, almost in an incredible way, of the changes that are taking place in today's society, which have profoundly affected to social organizations, which are faced not only with innovations in science and technology, but also with modifications in the principles and concepts of the nature of man.
Higher education organizations, universities, basically share the mission that is distinctive of educational organizations; they must: "Preserve, develop and promote, through their substantive processes and in close connection with society, the culture of humanity" (Horruitiner, P., 2006). Universities are building and assuming certain particularities in function of fulfilling their mission in the different historical periods, and in the different societies in which they are immersed, reflected in the basic activity of educating, which constitutes the primary objective of their mission; so that, although universities have never stopped educating, the forms, procedures (including those of a formal and informal nature) that they generate for it.
But at the same time they have undergone modifications: they change, for example, the organizational structures that are formed for this activity, the means that are prioritized for teaching (currently, audiovisuals are prioritized and more recently the so-called information technology and ICT communication), the contents to be taught and the forms of organization of these also change (which is reflected in the study plans), the way of conceiving the interactions that are established in the educational process (the student-teacher relationship has been and is currently the object of analysis, in fact undergoing modifications and encouraging the appearance of figures with new conceptions, such as the case of the "tutor" in higher education).
Currently, several elements that have undergone changes in universities are highlighted, with respect to the traditional forms of structuring and functioning of these, and that typify them today (Horruitiner, P. 2006):
Massification.
Loss of exclusivity as institutions that generate superior knowledge (the so-called "Corporate Universities" appear).
Decreased autonomy: they have had to strengthen their ties (social, economic, cultural) with society, further specifying their social responsibility, which has been manifested in the appearance of instruments that validate their work, that render accounts to society. The most frequent forms of this are the processes of institutional evaluation and accreditation.
Comprehensive training: universities are increasingly moving towards the formation of values and skills, of creative professionals, capable of assuming their self-education, independent, capable, in addition, of working in professional teams.
It is increasingly supported by new technological scenarios (ICTs). This is introducing sensible changes in the universities, fundamentally in the way of thinking of the professors, to be able to fully assume the new technologies.
These elements allow us to illustrate that the universities, although they have maintained the mission with which they emerged as organizations and many of their distinctive characteristics, have also suffered and are undergoing significant changes, determined by the close relationship they maintain with society, and the demands that This imposes on them, as an important part of their social task is precisely to guarantee the training of competent professionals, and the competence implies adaptation to the social historical context in which they work. It is not only necessary to accept the internal dynamics of the system, but also to recognize that the context in which it develops is an integral part of the organism.
What has been stated for the school as an organization and in particular for the university as responsible for the higher stage of education, is valid for the other organizations that society has at a given historical-social moment, which are subjected to the challenges that they involve changes in society.
The strongest determinant of dynamism in organizations are external demands: the environment imposes the needs for change, the phenomena that occur within the organization, its culture, determines the "rhythm" of these changes, guides their scope, and the most feasible alternatives to achieve it. This relationship is verified in an articulated way: change occurs, occurs with one degree or another of intensity, takes one form or another, depending on the relationship between what the members of an organization propose and what the external environment imposes, demand.
There have been several spaces for reflection at the international level on the implications that the so-called «age of knowledge» has for education; the search for the best alternatives to face this challenge that undoubtedly must involve, and in fact has already promoted, is intense. profound changes in the conception of universities, and with it, progressively, of their culture. They have also been the spaces to debate on other spheres of men's relationship, from commerce to the arts, including the ways to combat scourges of the time, such as some types of diseases that become pandemics, or the management of conflicts between nations and peoples.
Accepting then that organization and environment are in continuous and intimate interaction, being in an indissoluble relationship, and understanding that both are kept in constant change, evolution, movement and adaptation, leads to think that the development category can and should be focused in the field of organizations. From these reflections, certain questions arise: what are the conceptions of development studied in the organizational world? Is it possible to speak of development in educational organizations? Do all changes in educational organizations imply development? methodology that facilitates, guides or drives the processes of change in educational organizations?
Many authors refer to their conceptions about the problem of development in organizations and a large part of these relate it to concepts such as change and adaptive capacity of the organization in change. More than a category of analysis in the organizational world, the issue of development in organizations has been worked as an intervention methodology, it has become the instrument par excellence for change in search of achieving greater organizational efficiency, an indispensable condition in the world current, characterized by intense national and international competition.
For Chiavenatto: «It is a planned process of cultural and structural modifications, which visualizes the institutionalization of a series of social technologies, so that the organization is empowered to diagnose, plan and implement those modifications with the assistance of a consultant. It is a very complex educational effort, aimed at changing the organization's attitudes, values, behaviors and structure, so that it can better adapt to the new situations, markets, technologies, problems and challenges that constantly arise ».
The incipient set of concepts, means of help and technical procedures aimed at improving the efficiency of organizations and their ability to cope with changes, has been called Organizational Development (OD), according to Margulies and Raia (1974). These authors also argue that organized development is essentially a systems approach, with a view to the total set of functional and interpersonal relationships in organisms. But at the same time, there are different positions regarding the conceptualization of OD, finding numerous points of view among the authors that treat it. The following aspects are highlighted below when addressing OD:
1. Organizational development is a response to change and, at the same time, it is a process that stimulates planned or planned organizational change, long-term, long-term and with the assistance of a consultant, facilitator or agent of change.
2. It promotes modifications in the cultural and structural levels of the organization, studies its culture: values, behaviors, attitudes, ideals, shared beliefs and promotes the creation of a culture that allows the achievement of efficiency, effectiveness, well-being, improvement of quality of life and health of the organization, in addition to the search for a participatory management structure.
3. Recognizes the interaction between the organization and the environment, its constant and rapid mutation and, therefore, the need for continuous adaptation.
4. It is based on the behavioral sciences, it seeks the institutionalization of social technologies, including action research.
5. Recognizes the interaction between the individual and the organization, states that human resources are decisive for the success or failure of any organization. Consequently, its management is key to business and organizational success.
It promotes the reorientation of thought and the optimal use of its potential towards the analysis of organizational problems, seeks a balance between individual objectives and organizational objectives, promoting humanistic and democratic values in organizations. Seek the correct understanding of the true essence of human nature.
6. Seeks to apply group dynamics in the planned change processes of the organization and the behavior of groups and intergroups.
7. It acquires various dimensions of action such as: diagnosis, planning, research, experimentation, intervention and the educational dimension that allows the organization to acquire certain tools for achieving self-management of change and self-development.
This is how DO is constituted as a technique intended to help organizations successfully face the challenges that are presented to them in the current socioeconomic context; For their part, Margulies and Raia (1974) warn that our social organizations learn, perhaps too slowly, that they are not capable of understanding or facing the devastating pace of internal and external changes, if they do not have the help of certain modifications. fundamental in administration and technology.
It is important, then, to recognize that we live in times when organizational power based on coercion and threats gradually recedes to that based on collaboration and reason, imposing the need to give way to an administrative authority based on delegated rights, on the basis of of organizing principles based on humanistic and democratic ideals, gradually displacing and replacing the bureaucratic principles of organizational systems.
However, it is necessary to bear in mind that the only way to produce true changes in organizations is through changing their "culture", that is, what makes it unique and affects everything that happens in it. This means exploring the characteristics of its members: their experience, their way of perceiving, feeling and acting in the face of problems, changing the systems of life, beliefs, values and accepted forms of relationships between people.
Understand then the products of the activity of these organizations, as a way even to be able to intentionally direct to some extent the change in them.
For OD, the heart of development is usually found in change and is aimed at improving the efficiency of organizations. Progress and change are in contradiction with traditional beliefs, systems and procedures. It is therefore essential to seek other ways and uses that adapt it to the current situation, naturally different from that of the past and allow it to respond to the growing demands for change, typical of our historical-social context.
The understanding of educational organizations as culture, the recognition of their subjective and ideological aspects, of their close relationship with the individual and group imaginary, as well as their interaction with the external environment, also implies assuming them as dynamic systems: stable enough to fulfill a guiding function, and at the same time flexible to guarantee their adaptation to the environment and development. So they are in constant change, in endless structuring-destructuring of their tangible and symbolic components.
In this process of transformation of organizations, its fundamental actors, that is, human resources, «… in addition to learning new ways of handling complex relationships in organisms, they learn to consider changes as a natural process and not as a special phenomenon. The process of change, therefore, can coalesce and merge with the many remaining processes in the life of organisms ”(Margulies Raia, 1974).
An essential aspect in human relationships is in the degree to which the members identify themselves as part of the organization (sense of belonging), the commitment they assume or that at least they are in a position to achieve satisfaction in them.
Likewise converge in this problem, the management styles (leadership) of the organization's managers. On many occasions, this important aspect is left to the intuition, common sense, and personal conditions of those who operate at the levels of authority (power), ignoring the fact that to direct properly it is necessary to have knowledge in the area and its appropriate application. The efficiency of the organization, which is required in terms of achieving the objectives for which it has been structured, depends fundamentally on the human resources that comprise it. Therefore, it is a first requirement of efficiency to have the human resources required to face the remains of the organization at all times.
Conceiving OD from this angle implies, therefore, refocusing the culture of the organization, from its basic assumptions, its values and architectural elements, considering that for the organization to succeed and develop it is essential to specify the following aspects: mission, understanding for her what must be accomplished at the present time; objectives, what it must achieve to fulfill its mission, clearly establishing which are the keys and which are complementary; tasks to be accomplished to achieve the objectives; vision, projection of the organization's movements to act proactively in relation to the expected changes in its environment and the challenges that it represents.
To achieve the above, the fundamental thing is the human resources that are available and how they should be developed through proper management of the same that fosters the individual development (ID) necessary to face the changes; in addition, the recruitment of those human resources that will be required according to the needs that the organization will present in its development process. As can be seen, it is a «new philosophy» organizational, which focuses on obtaining high efficiency and competitiveness based on the adaptation to the requirements, both of the external environment (demand for the organization) and of the internal environment (demands emanating from the own organization, in which human resources are key), acting proactively in the face of changes in the environment.
Educational organizations must develop their capacity for perception, sensitivity and adaptation, as a basic condition for their survival in this changing, unpredictable and turbulent environment, as a dynamic and living system that must be willing to change in favor of the adaptation and adjustment that allow you to face these changes successfully.
Conclusions
Organizations, as a typical way of structuring society today, have the challenge of changing in order to respond to the demands that the new environment imposes on society. An example of this are educational organizations in general, and universities in particular, which respond to the basic mission of training the subjects of a society, so that they culturally respond to the characteristics of their context and are, then, capable of contributing In its development. Therefore, if the environment changes, they must be able to change to continue fulfilling their mission.
The development of society implies that the organizations that act within it must achieve a high degree of efficiency and competitiveness to respond to the changing and complex demands that appear before them. This requires a dynamic DO, for which the development of your human resources becomes a cornerstone for success.
Properly interpreting the current moment and the demands it implies for the organization is the way to fulfill its mission; Being able to decipher what the movements of change will be and the demands that will appear is essential to project the movement of the organization and conceive its vision. The strategic role of having the necessary human resources at all times, conceiving their development through individual management and development programs, is essential to achieve DO.
Social scientists must become the vanguard of those who promote changes in people, groups, organisms and communities, studying the links and interactions that these establish, build and develop among themselves and with the environment. They must assume their role as managers of those profound changes that mediate the development of new attitudes and modes of behavior, in which educational organizations play an essential role.
Bibliographic references
1. Chiavenatto, I., cited by Durán Acevedo, Paulo. DO Organizational Development, seen at: http://www.gestiopolis.com/desarrollo-organizacional-do/ online Wednesday, April 28, 2007.
2. Horruitiner, P. (2006). The Cuban university: the training model. Havana, Cuba: Editorial Félix Varela.
3. Margulies, N & Raia, AP (1974). Organizational development. Values, process and technology. Mexico: Editorial Diana, SA
4. Schein, E. (1985). Organizational culture and leadership: a dynamic vision. Havana, Cuba: Editor.
