Organizations as elements that link the micro and the macro

His relationship with "The 7 Intelligences"

In 2002 we discussed the importance of organizations in the development of both individuals and organizations.

In this meeting, work carried out by Eric Gaynor Butterfield between the years 1990 and 1995 has been summarized, including a series of Conferences and Dissertations on Organizational Development.

In two of them, both held in the city of Buenos Aires, the focus was on the importance of the unit of analysis - Organizations, and how it impacts individual and business development.

The summary of these talks has given rise to an article that was published by the IAEF ("Argentine Institute of Finance Executives" in its monthly magazine of Finance Executives, corresponding to year 12, No. 123 of the month of March 1996. A It is described below, including some additional comments in light of the prevailing changes in the context that are impacting more and more strongly on companies in Latin America.

Organizations, as a key element for individual and economic development The Entrepreneur / Manager asks: What part of each science can I apply to improve my Company? In their daily work, the entrepreneur needs contributions and concrete solutions to consolidate his company and develop it efficiently for an effective positioning in the context. Several self-called "sciences" have made their contributions, all of them highlighting a particular approach that, due to its multitude and The diversity of “correct” answers hinders the selection process and their applicability in the daily decision-making of the Entrepreneur / Director of companies.

This review explores the limitations of the main approaches of these disciplines in terms of their applicability since there is generally not enough empirical evidence for the business environment, and suggests concentrating energies on the “state of the art” of behavioral sciences of Organizational Development, being this, in reality, the main unit of analysis.

It is suggested that the "missing link" between individuals and the community are Organizations and, therefore, the state of the art of this discipline can illustrate us on more effective and efficient ways for the development and growth of companies.

Therefore, our main hypothesis is that we must concentrate on the state of the art of Organizational Development, this being the business focal unit. We will call it organizational discipline since we know several things about their behavior, among them, mainly those things that we know "that we do not know."

Growth and development. Organizations: the “missing link” Growth in a community or nation is only as solid as the consistency of the “chain” of value added by individuals in their respective community. Different disciplines and self-styled “sciences” have developed growth theories and development at both the individual and community levels. Its distinctive features are usually centered on its different unit of analysis. In some cases they have focused on individuals (Psychology, Psychiatry), and in other cases on the community in general (such as Economics, Sociology, Political Sciences). It has also been extremely unfortunate, in our opinion, to select as the missing link,the body of knowledge that has been known - presumptuously by both the professors and the Universities themselves - as Science of Administration. In this paper some conclusions regarding the possible contributions made by anthropologists to the business world are shared.

The field work that I have carried out over several years, including more than 100 consultancy interventions, suggests that the degree of development of organizations is a relevant variable for both the development of individual growth in a community and for the growth of the community. as a whole.

Therefore, one of the hypotheses of this article suggests that the “individual intelligence” of some members is not enough to achieve the development and growth of the community, and in turn, the community limitations restrict - in what we will call a second cycle - the development of such individual intelligences.

The missing link is what we call "collective intelligence" that is very strongly related to the growth of companies (Organizational Development).

This suggests that the wealth of the supposed "economy" of the nations with a higher degree of economic development is based mainly on the degree of strength of their organizations.

In reality, this has been the case at all times, since it is companies that compete with each other to win a market and have a significant portion of it, surviving those that can live "competitively". To compete, companies must have products and services that are "paid for" by their Clients, and this in turn generates the need to develop a workforce that makes its contribution to the production and subsequent "delivery" of the respective products and services.

This simple fact has not always been taken into account by economists, sociologists and politicians, who in their traditional approach through deductive methodology assume "top down" hypotheses where they always play with the white chess pieces and the others sometimes can't even get to "move their black pieces."

The price paid for this approach is enormous, and we can predict that the consequences can be lethal in the very short term.

In the review that follows, and in our eagerness to clarify the role of the different disciplines to the employer, a review of the main "sciences" is included and some suggestions are made regarding considerations to be taken into account by entrepreneurs. Actually what We would like in this work to alert entrepreneurs to the LIMITATIONS of applying principles, techniques, hypotheses, theories, best practices, in the business world, which are generated by disciplines that seem to be attached to the business world, but which may have unanticipated consequences. in organizations Growth and development theories (at the individual and community level) Scholars,Development and growth practitioners and researchers at both the individual, economic and social level have distinguished themselves mainly by selecting a different unit of analysis (individual, group, organization, community).

There are those who postulate the individual as the main driving force and therefore focus their interest on people and, at the other extreme, we have those who, using a deductive approach, assume that what happens to people is a consequence of "systems" (economists, sociologists, political scientists). Let's look at some professions.

Psychology / Psychiatry Both psychologists and psychiatrists have made very important contributions in relation to the daily actions of individuals. However, we believe that a main limitation to be taken into account is based on the fact that a very significant part of the “empirical evidence that supports their theoretical frameworks” is based on cases of behavioral deviations. And for us, unlike them, what interests us is the insertion of men in organizations (more specifically in their work within organizations).In our opinion, the insertion of the individual in organizations is the relevant variable (variable dependent in terms of the researcher). On the other hand, for scholars at the individual - and not organizational - level, the relevant variable is "deviant behavior",which is not the characteristic of most organizational participants. ”In this regard, it is worth mentioning the extraordinary work done by Dr. Donald Cole (President of The Organization Development Institute, USA), which was published in his book entitled“ Professional Suicide or Organizational Murder ”(1). Dr. Donald Cole did consulting - and research - work in a high tech company - where the organization "lost" its young and talented staff after the initial honeymoon period within the company.USA) which was published in the book of his authorship entitled “Professional Suicide or Organizational Murder” (1). Dr. Donald Cole did consulting - and research - work in a high tech company - where the organization "lost" its young and talented staff after the initial honeymoon period within the company.USA) which was published in the book of his authorship entitled “Professional Suicide or Organizational Murder” (1). Dr. Donald Cole did consulting - and research - work in a high tech company - where the organization "lost" its young and talented staff after the initial honeymoon period within the company.

Dr. Cole suggests that most of these people have had no problems during childhood or with their parents (the Freudian approach would be one of "partial and limited" use); the real and real problem is that they were all working long (and too many) hours and did not have enough time to spend with their family and with themselves!

On the other hand, and regardless of the considerations mentioned above, it is also important to bear in mind that a characteristic of scholars at this level of analysis is to assume that the "human brain is a black box." As FHC Crick pointed out in “Reflections on the brain:,,,“ The difficulty of dealing with a black box is that, unless such a box is very simple in itself, a phase is soon reached in which various theories rivals explain everything, all of them equally well, with respect to the same observed results. ”In its Spanish version, this book incorporates the applicability of the conceptual framework and its respective working hypotheses in relation to findings and evidence within organizations and companies in Latin America.

This work is carried out by Dr. Eric Gaynor - RODP, who is co-author with Dr. Donald Cole in this new edition of the original book in English, this time published in Spanish under the name “Professional Suicide or Organizational Murder”.

Economy In relation to the important contributions made by economists, we find as a limiting factor the fact that their most significant contributions are made at the level of "explaining phenomena." However, we must recognize that as an economics science its ability to predict phenomena has not been robust enough in all cases.

As all science must have a predictive capacity - in addition to the explanatory thing - it is extremely unfortunate that economic predictions are, and continue to be, far from reality.

In fact, as a predictive science, their contributions have been minor in relation to their capacity for explanatory science (the day after the lottery we all know which is the winning ticket).

This limited predictive capacity is increasingly present in the most representative organs and voices of society. Recently (La Nación newspaper of January 19, 1995) Mr. M Bein concluded by referring to the different macroeconomic forecasts for Argentina in 1996, that “… Like the memorable character of Peter Sellers - Chancey Gardiner - who seemed to advance from his vision Of the four seasons, the political times to come, this year we have once again fulfilled the routine of forecasting, without much foundation, the future of the economy and the level of activity. Just like Gardiner, from the garden ”.

We understand that the predictive capacity is of the utmost importance since the (subsequent) ability to “explain” negative consequences is anecdotally important for those who, in their position as business leaders, are immersed in developing mechanisms for continued and sustained success in their Not to mention the dire consequences of some economic postulates such as the Keynesian Theory with its implicit suggestion, - applied with great "efficiency" by many States -, of the convenience of drilling wells in the street for the purpose to generate sources of work… and that this is taken into account in underdeveloped countries where not only the streets are literally destroyed but also even the pedestrian sidewalks are difficult to traffic due to their irregular road…

The cost of this “bad practice” - needless to say totally unreasonable for countries with a lower relative degree of development - has only just begun to want to reverse itself after more than 50 years later, where the unfortunate negative consequences of the aforementioned practice are “explained”.

And now the question we ask ourselves is the following: Why should entrepreneurs and organizations pay the consequences of: wrong economic “practices” based on predictions that are far from reality; And a poor “predictive” capacity that fails to anticipate negative consequences for the employer? Another limitation of the economic discipline is based on the fact that it assumes the deductive method as a scientific method. The deductive methodology, when it does not find empirical validity in the facts and does not allow replicating the supposedly valid hypotheses, lead to the development of supposedly valid theories with lethal consequences with those engaged in business work and authentic job generation.It should also be taken into account that in practice many economists assume that they "play with the white pieces" and that any new resolution (for example in tax matters) must have certain unambiguous consequences. Well in practice this has not happened; In fact, the rest of the individuals and especially the businessmen - even if they begin to play with the black pieces and the economists have the advantage move - can very quickly transform a defensive position into an eventual attack. Unfortunately, when all this ends, the pain and business disaster is present and it is impossible to return to the initial situation. In fact, many of the limitations of the economy are based on the fact that their hypotheses are based on extreme situations, which are the exception.And it is very difficult to carry out the economy as a whole when we only consider the minority… Before concluding, I would like to mention one of the basic assumptions on which "Economic Science" is based. It proposes that "resources are limited." Fortunately, scholars of human behavior are finding more solid evidence every day that does not support the above hypothesis. Anthropology Anthropologists have enriched the state of the art in the history of mankind and have also made very valuable contributions by exploring the transitions of man in time. in order to discover the fundamental truth about our nature and its respective implications for both economic and social development.They have alerted scholars of man about the cultural and social systems of life in the so-called "primitive" communities, which has allowed us to open our eyes to a different perspective. However, many of these communities under study have perhaps not gone back as far back as Enough, just as ethnologists, paleontologists, or zoologists do. That is why, in more than one case, many of its evidences, which are supposedly applicable to "primitive" communities, are actually related to communities "in the process of extermination." Therefore, the exploration of their ways of life Communities made by anthropologists under these circumstances do not always reflect characteristics of primitive communities in their character as our ancestors.To a lesser extent, they help us to investigate the origin of man and his transformation processes until the presence of man today. As Desmond Morris points out in “The Naked Man”: “The simple tribal groups living today are not primitive, but rather brutalized. The true primitive tribes have ceased to exist for thousands of years. ”Administration This is the discipline that affects us as authors in a most personal way, since it has been the foundation of our first university studies. In any case, and at this point in my life, it is not only incorrect but also arrogant to speak of Administration Science. For the moment we share with economists an orientation towards the explanation of phenomena (which some gurus have managed to expand into the area of the prophecies),to the detriment of a predictive capacity that is what entrepreneurs require us every day. Entrepreneurs by now have been sufficiently punished by the "contributions" of professionals, professors and consultants who only come to explain - in the best of cases - past events based on conjectures that do not have empirical evidence. Managing incorporates the concept. to act on "what already exists" but is unable to develop a Vision to enhance and create the development of an organization.professors and consultants who only manage to explain - in the best of cases - past events based on conjectures that do not have empirical evidence. Administering incorporates the concept of acting on "what already exists" but is unable to develop a Vision to empower and create the development of an organization.professors and consultants who only manage to explain - in the best of cases - past events based on conjectures that do not have empirical evidence. Administering incorporates the concept of acting on "what already exists" but is unable to develop a Vision to empower and create the development of an organization.

That is why studies on the development of Entrepreneurial capacity do not find a firm response in the Administration treaties or in the leading Universities in the world in the area of "Business Administration". Rather, many successful entrepreneurs have chosen to move away from university cloisters where "Business Administration" studies are privileged.

Such is the case of Bill Gates who has dropped out of Harvard Business School. Likewise, the greatest inventor of all time - Thomas Edison - also moved away from formal educational centers, being considered by his professors a poor student… All this suggests that perhaps entrepreneurs - and those with capacities to create organizations (and why not also ensure continuity, efficiency and profitability) - possibly they fall under the famous phrase of the ingenious Irishman Bernard Shaw: _ ”I interrupted my education when I started my formal studies”.

A research paper that I led a year ago summarizes some 50 "Best Management Practices" as "unique" and more efficient ways to manage. Now, and if this were true, how is it possible that with an average validity of 4 years for each one of them, more than 7 (supposedly "unique") Best Practices coexist simultaneously? Even academics, professors, consultants and researchers have not found an answer to this question. We can generously give them time to solve it, although paradoxically, the passage of time makes it increasingly difficult to find an answer as new best Practices “appear”… Organization Science (we suggest calling it discipline or art) Say that a company that has a entire building for their offices is an organization,It is the same as saying that a person who is blind is not blind due to the fact that they have a pair of eyes.Between 1990 and 1993 we have carried out field work where we have been able to observe that the most vigorous economies are those that have Organizations (and individuals) vigorous. When Rostow concludes his treatise on stages of economic development, he places Argentina in the “take-off” stage that placed Argentina in an expectant position. Many years later, we observe with sadness and disappointment, our estrangement with not only developed economies of that time,but even with economies that were positioned in our “take-off” stage… and we began to perceive in the 1950s - where the “small businessman” already had on their shoulders the problems that the governments “said” that they worried - that we would gradually approach underdevelopment similar to that of the poorest countries. Many wonder what is the explanation for this phenomenon? What is causing this race towards deterioration? For its work Rostow has taken into account numerous "economic" indicators that represent common practices for its economic projections.Many wonder what is the explanation for this phenomenon? What is causing this race towards deterioration? For its work Rostow has taken into account numerous "economic" indicators that represent common practices for its economic projections.Many wonder what is the explanation for this phenomenon? What is causing this race towards deterioration? For its work Rostow has taken into account numerous "economic" indicators that represent common practices for its economic projections.

However, it did not prioritize the importance of the degree of development of the organizations and institutions, or to be more precise, it privileged the organizational growth of the state apparatus and the entrepreneurs (please confuse them with the state contractors) in addition to all the problems to which they have been used to it (lack of credit, difficulties in starting their business, a truly competitive market unlike both state and multinational oligopolistic and monopoly companies, import restrictions, inspections of their companies bordering on extortion, among others), to all these limitations of an “external” type to the company it added a lethal mechanism: its own personnel.Already Lincoln - based on a biblical passage - had foreshadowed "… a house cannot sustain itself if it is divided inside."

Interviews with small entrepreneurs conducted periodically show that more and more of them want “a company without people”; How will a small businessman who lost his light metallurgical factory in the city of Rosario participate with us as a result of "lawsuits" for deafness: What incentive do employers have to assume with the staff our responsibilities that go beyond those we have with our family; at least my family has to keep my assets when I die… instead now it is my staff who are keeping my factory… "

- The degree of development of the Organizations of other countries situated in the “take-off” stage such as Canada, Australia and New Zealand was significantly higher than that of Argentina at that time, and none of these three countries developed an anti-political policy. organizational development business for SMEs like the one that took place in Argentina. Had Rostow prioritized the importance of the variable “level of organizational development”, it is possible that the NO would have positioned Argentina alongside the three economies mentioned above.

We intend with this to alert those responsible for generating "economic policies" to observe the number of employed personnel in developed countries who work in SMEs, and on the other hand, to observe how assistance is provided to these companies that have everything at risk. comparison of mono and oligopolistic companies.

We foreshadowed at the end of the 1960s that Argentina would gradually lose its hegemonic condition in Latin America and that this would be accompanied by growing unemployment. Nowadays, no sensible person would suggest locating Argentina at the same level of development as Canada, Australia or New Zealand… and please do not make us listen to that sentence "that we would have been better off if instead of Italians and Spaniards the English to Argentina ”. Until 1940 - the date on which Rostow locates the degree of economic development of Argentina, our country had mainly had an immigration of Spanish and Italian origin and we did very, very well until 1940.

In our opinion, the variable that makes the difference - and precipitates the deterioration of Argentina - is not the immigration trend prior to 1940 (which was primarily Spanish and Italian, and this is true), but the systematic attack on the businessman (small and innovator that creates and generates work for others), which began in the late 1940s and, paradoxically, is perpetuated despite its lethal consequences for the country as a whole.

Returning to the point of this section, our suggestion to lead by example is not to talk about an organization science yet, since there are also presumptuous academics, researchers and practitioners in this discipline. Those of us who have been trained in Organizational Development prefer to be cautious on this issue, although we are pleased to see how empirical evidence has been found for different conceptions of this growing discipline, since it has begun to discriminate how much we know is not true of how little We do know that it is true, a fact that represents a very important step in scientific endeavor.

If we add to this the important contributions of the state of the art of Behavioral Sciences, we already find a discipline - Organizational Development - with a solid foundation.

In our opinion, the so-called Organization Theories represent rather the prejudices of those who create and develop them (consultants and academics), and, therefore, they become organizational prejudices. And there is nothing wrong with recognizing the limitations of knowledge based on the fact that our concepts are really nothing more than our prejudices, which is much more realistic and positive than advertising a theory as infallible. For the moment, we would begin in this way by assigning the words their own meaning: we will be issuing “judgments in advance which is the real meaning of prejudices.” Human Behavior scholars have made significant contributions in the field of the integration of the Individual with the Organization, and in turn of this with its context.It is not the purpose of this article to analyze in detail the scope, meaning and implications of these discoveries, but we do want to alert entrepreneurs and businessmen of the relevant contributions made by those who have had Organizations as a focus of interest (instead of the economy or individuals). In a conference held a month ago in the province of Mendoza (Eric Gaynor, 1995) I have developed a small compendium of the main “Best Practices” of the last 20 years and the main disciplines / organizational arts (vainly called theories) generated in the last 50 years. For the time being, these practitioners and researchers have begun to discriminate those (few) "things that are known to be true" from those "variables that we still do not know how they impact or behave."Furthermore, by focusing on the organization as an indispensable link in the Individual - Organization - Economy growth chain, it enables the completion of the growth cycle for these three distinctive units of analysis. Disregarding or downplaying this second link - Organizations - has represented a very expensive price that is already being paid by both Individuals and the Economy, especially in countries with less economic development.Note: Eric Gaynor Butterfield was invited to publish this Presentation in the magazine of the Argentine Institute of Finance Executives for the month of March 1996 - Year 12 Number 123. The IAEF is a member of the “International Association of Financial Executives Institutes”.By focusing on the organization as the indispensable link in the Individual - Organization - Economy growth chain, it enables the completion of the growth cycle for these three distinctive units of analysis. Ignoring or downplaying this second link - Organizations - has represented a very expensive price that is already being paid by both Individuals and the Economy, especially in countries with less economic development.Note: Eric Gaynor Butterfield was invited to publish this Presentation in the magazine of the Argentine Institute of Finance Executives for the month of March 1996 - Year 12 Number 123. The IAEF is a member of the “International Association of Financial Executives Institutes”.By focusing on the organization as the indispensable link in the Individual - Organization - Economy growth chain, it enables the completion of the growth cycle for these three distinctive units of analysis. Ignoring or downplaying this second link - Organizations - has represented a very expensive price that is already being paid by both Individuals and the Economy, especially in countries with less economic development.Note: Eric Gaynor Butterfield was invited to publish this Presentation in the magazine of the Argentine Institute of Finance Executives for the month of March 1996 - Year 12 Number 123. The IAEF is a member of the “International Association of Financial Executives Institutes”.Ignoring or downplaying this second link - Organizations - has represented a very expensive price that is already being paid by both Individuals and the Economy, especially in countries with less economic development.Note: Eric Gaynor Butterfield was invited to publish this Presentation in the magazine of the Argentine Institute of Finance Executives for the month of March 1996 - Year 12 Number 123. The IAEF is a member of the “International Association of Financial Executives Institutes”.Ignoring or downplaying this second link - Organizations - has represented a very expensive price that is already being paid by both Individuals and the Economy, especially in countries with less economic development.Note: Eric Gaynor Butterfield was invited to publish this Presentation in the magazine of the Argentine Institute of Finance Executives for the month of March 1996 - Year 12 Number 123. The IAEF is a member of the “International Association of Financial Executives Institutes”.Eric Gaynor Butterfield was invited to publish this presentation in the magazine of the Argentine Institute of Finance Executives for the month of March 1996 - Year 12 Number 123. The IAEF is a member of the “International Association of Financial Executives Institutes”.Eric Gaynor Butterfield was invited to publish this presentation in the magazine of the Argentine Institute of Finance Executives for the month of March 1996 - Year 12 Number 123. The IAEF is a member of the “International Association of Financial Executives Institutes”.

Eric Gaynor Butterfield's Note: I make frequent use of this article in Courses, Seminars, Business Workshops where I seek to familiarize participants with "theory and practice", and explore the limitations and opportunities of both. Participants have stated that they have benefited in terms of the content of theory and practice, and especially in relation to the implementation of organizational changes and improvements. They have also stated that they have awakened a "critical" capacity both towards the work of consultants but also in relation to university professors.

Notable experts who have linked organizations with the economic context In order to provide the reader with different perspectives from notable experts who have studied the level of correspondence between organizations and their context (and within this, considering the variable "economy") we must include Below are several main authors that should not fail to be taken into account by all those consultants and specialists interested in the processes of change and organizational development: Kenneth E. Boulding Kenneth Boulding was born in England at the beginning of the 20th century (year 1910). He was a Quaker and as such he devoted many of his efforts to studying the relationship between organizations and moral values.For Boulding, everything that happens on the planet has more and more to do with organizations that manifest themselves as companies, unions, political parties, voluntary organizations, the national, provincial and municipal government and different Business Chambers both in the industrial sector, as in the primary. Kenneth has called this type of paradigm shift "Organizational Revolution." Kenneth Boulding ("The Organizational Revolution"; Harper - 1953) points out that the revolution is motivated by the fact that people have new habits and needs, but above all Of these habits and needs, what has really had the greatest impact on the “organizational revolution” are the changes that have occurred in the techniques, procedures, techniques and methodologies of how it should be organized.The sustained growth of organizations has left its mark, since there are members who belong to the internal organization and other members who are outside the organization. And, according to Boulding, this creates an ethical dilemma that cannot be resolved within the 10 Commandments or with the Sermon on the Mount in mind. In addition, the ethical dilemma has to do with the different levels of organizational hierarchy since senior management may have to respond to several fronts, in addition to having to respond to society as a whole. From the moment that companies are subjected to the market - which It has more to do with (financial) business than with companies - and the market does not necessarily respond to competitive and specialization rules,the organizational revolution comes into conflict with the ethical component due to super-monopolies and conglomerates under rules of economies of scale, both productive and financial. This makes necessary the existence of a market economy that is regulated and that it is through political representation, which can be achieved through a social democracy.Burnham, JamesHe was an interesting character as he started out as a member of the Trotskyist party and ended his days struggling to uphold his basic hypothesis which was that society would move towards being run by "managers", which he called the "managerial revolution." E. Whyte in his well-known book entitled “Organization Man” remains within the line of Burnham. According to James Burnham (“The Managerial Revolution”; Peter Smith - 1941) even in communist countries there was a managerial force that was the class dominant, since for example the Soviet Union did not move towards socialism but neither did capitalism. The people who play the managerial roles have to have the power, the privileges and the resources, and therefore they would end up being the ruling class.In order to discriminate with respect to the different profiles of individuals and organizational units, Burnham develops a typology made up of four characters: the shareholders who have a totally passive role within the company, the financiers who have an interest only in the financial aspects that the company reaches, and who It is totally independent of what the company does Executives who establish the organizational vision and mission, are interested in the strategy and closely follow the profits and return on investment as main indicators as well as the progress of the income. to do with the organizational processes and the day-to-day operation of the organization, which deal with effectively integrating financial, material, technological and human resources,whom James Burnham calls managers. According to James Burnham, only those who are included in the fourth category are those that play a vital role in the production process, and he suggests that evidence of this is found both within the Soviet Union and elsewhere. the growth of large corporations in other countries. And this is because managers have a self-confidence that exceeds that of bankers, owners, workers, farmers, and merchants. He goes so far as to suggest that in many "civilized" countries Parliament is being replaced by administrative offices. It is no accident that a person educated in England (Oxford) comes to these conclusions. Nor is it by chance that John M. Keynes (“The general theory of employment, interest and money”; London:Macmillan - 1936) has developed an economic theory where business and financial activity are privileged over business, productive activity. We believe that Joseph Schumpeter (“Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy”; New York: Harper - 1942). Through his theory of the “innovative entrepreneur” he is much closer to the needs of both developing countries and those that have a higher degree of development.Through his theory of the "innovative entrepreneur" he is much closer to the needs of both developing countries and those with a higher degree of development.Through his theory of the "innovative entrepreneur" he is much closer to the needs of both developing countries and those with a higher degree of development.Galbraith, John KennethDespite being born in Canada, JK Galbraith spent most of his life in the United States of America. She has spent most of her life struggling to show that capitalism in the United States of America has undergone major transformations, and therefore traditional economic theory is of no practical use. It suggests that despite the fact that in the beginning, companies seem to compete hard, over time this situation is turned upside down with very few organizations, presenting a situation that is known under the name of oligopoly. Galbraith suggests that there are no significant differences between the organizations of different countries, both in terms of their structure and in relation to planning, decision-making and control mechanisms.When the company begins to circulate near the limits of a (financial) business, the equipment, machinery and capital requirements will almost always privilege the large corporation which, in turn, will depend on the government (who is always attentive to their operations and profits).Large corporations have increasingly greater and better advantages over small and medium-sized companies since, due to their volume and economy of scale, they are in a better position to dedicate financial resources to research and development. These types of organizations are in a better position to satisfy technological requirements by strengthening the relationship between the organization - the market - and the government.Galbraith suggests that there are six fundamental aspects that occur in the process by which organizations grow in size and scope. The first of them, according to John Kenneth Galbraith, suggests that the period of time that elapses between the idea of a product and its final manufacture is increasing (something with which we do not fully agree). Second, we must bear in mind that as the capital dedicated to production increases, more investment is required.Second, we must bear in mind that as the capital dedicated to production increases, more investment is required.Second, we must bear in mind that as the capital dedicated to production increases, more investment is required.

Third, consideration must be given to the fact that once we have committed so much time, money, and energy, our chances of backtracking diminish. Fourth, large corporations require a professionalized techno-structure, and fifthly, organizations gain in complexity through matrix organizational arrangements and beyond them, which in turn make it more necessary to develop coordination and cooperation mechanisms between individualities that are they distance more and more from each other. Finally, and sixthly, the above-mentioned requirements increasingly put more and more pressure on planning needs.

All these requirements together show that the “industrial system” typical of large corporations is the only one that can make use of the benefits of new technologies that are presented in contexts under risk situations.

Actually for Galbraith the major planning of large corporations is really oriented towards "replacing the role of the market" over reducing uncertainties and risks, and companies can have greater control over the consumer making it dependent on the organization - as for example to through advertising - or by having a single customer (as when the government becomes the Customer).

Under both situations, there is a tendency for the company to be no more than a small administrative apparatus of the government, as when it acts as a tax collector. Sooner or later, companies will have to grow and transform into businesses to survive the forces of the market, and finally they will be dependent bodies of the government that has too much free time to choose what exact portion of the cake (taxes) it should demand.

As additional reading material we suggest accessing: John K. Galbraith: “The affluent society”; Hamilton - 1958 John K. Galbraith: "American Capitalism"; Houghton Mifflin - 1962 John K. Galbraith: The age of uncertainty ”; André Deutsch - 1977. Perrow, CharlesCharles Perrow is a sociologist and starts from a very different point of view from most experts in organizational behavior and organizational development. For Charles what counts are "structure, technology, context and objectives" and that is why these factors are what he has emphasized in his book: "Organizational analysis: a sociological view", Tavistock Publications, 1970. To further strengthen his position on organizational behavior, he points out that other variables such as "leadership, interpersonal relationships, morals and productivity" have been given less importance. It is his opinion that if the focus of our interest is on organizations, then the The structural approach that characterizes sociology is superior to the approach that prioritizes the individual or group processes.It suggests that efforts to change the personality and attitude of organizational participants in order to produce behavioral changes, is not something that can be achieved "reasonably" and even more so, efforts to do so put an extra burden on the company since Such efforts are really costly. In the first chapter of his book (mentioned above) he points out that what some people would "see" as problems at the organizational member or organizational group level is actually (according to Perrow) a problem of structure.It is not something that can be achieved "reasonably" and even more so the efforts to do so put an extra burden on the company since such efforts are really costly. In the first chapter of his book (mentioned above) he highlights that what some people " they would see "as problems at the level of the organizational member or of organizational groups, in reality (according to Perrow) it is a problem of structure.It is not something that can be achieved "reasonably" and even more so the efforts to do so put an extra burden on the company since such efforts are really costly. In the first chapter of his book (mentioned above) he highlights that what some people " they would see "as problems at the level of the organizational member or of organizational groups, in reality (according to Perrow) it is a problem of structure.

In the second book, he addresses a question that almost all practitioners, academics and researchers have asked in the field of organizations that has to do with the possibility of identifying different organizational typologies since only when the manager identifies “another organizational type” is he able to to understand your own. And in relation to this important question, Charles Perrow suggests that saying "that there is no single best way to organize" is not enough and does not get us anywhere; Furthermore, this phrase is partially valid because there are actually systematic differences between organizations and also systematic similarities between them that lead us to different degrees of efficiency for the different organizational arrangements.

And this is where he suggests that instead of developing management principles (Henry Fayol: "General and industrial management"; Pitman - 1949) and more recent authors such as "The 7 Habits of Effective People" (Stephen Covey) "it is better to dedicate our energies to identify patterns of variation - in organizational arrangements - that then help us to predict and explain organizational phenomena.

For Charles Perrow, bureaucracy is a very good mechanism that allows reducing the impact of influences “from outside the organization”, and on the other hand, as a consequence of a high degree of internal specialization based on the expertise of the organizational members, it allows to control and reduce uncertainties regarding the company's processes and products / services.

What has happened in the context in the last 60 years has had a strong impact on companies and that is where the bureaucratic organization has started to have problems. The risk factor appears as inherent in every company, and this risk factor with its consequent uncertainties and some variables out of control, make it necessary to operate in a different way than what we had in mind regarding the bureaucratic organization.

In fact, the bureaucracy favors "routinizing everything that can be routinized" but not even the strongest proponent of the bureaucratic organization will be so stupid as to come to accept that within the organization all units must perform their tasks and activities routinely. In every organization "someone" has to be thinking about a new market, a new product, a new way of marketing the product, and how to provide a new and better service; And, of course, this requires a unit (which can be Research and Development) where both the people and the tasks are not routine.

Taking into account this new need to take into account the risk variable that has been accelerating over time, especially in developed countries (countries that rapidly consume the natural resources of the less developed countries and above what they can continue to generate) and its impact on organizations, they have to develop within their limits with the context different types of "buffer units" that must necessarily be flexible as work groups and, within these groups, it is necessary to have highly creative and innovative people.

Thus, according to Charles Perrow, it is not only necessary that there are both routine and non-routine units, tasks, activities and processes, but it is also very possible that the differences between them have to be ever greater. And then it goes on to expand more on this concept, distinguishing particularities that had not been previously taken into account, identifying two different types of dimensions based on technologies or techniques (technology being a way of transforming material resources into products and services).

degree of routinization of the "search" or "non-analysable search procedures". Of course the machinery and equipment are not the technology of the company, but rather they are simple tools. Here Perrow observes what happens to an organizational participant when he receives an order or a signal, which he generalizes under the name of stimulus. When a person receives a stimulus, he initiates a search (which he calls "seeking behavior") where even "not appreciating the stimulus" is also a certain type of response. However, the stimulus that the person receives can be “analyzable” since it has already been presented in some way in the past and is familiar to him or else, instead, what the participant initiates is a process that Charles Perrow calls “procedures of unanalyzable search ”(which has not occurred in the past).This variable would have to do with “the number of exceptions that the person faces”. Degree of “stimulus variability”. When confronting the task, people can consider it as that there is a great variability of problems that lead us to a “behavioral search.” Sometimes the variety of stimuli is very great and each task can be seen as of such magnitude that it requires a significant search magnitude. At other times the stimulus is not very variable or different in its magnitude and the participant is confronted with a situation where the situations are familiar and others are new. And Perrow cites the case of the automotive industry where every year a new model of car comes out with different parts but the variability of these new stimuli becomes familiar to different people.From the combination of these two variables, four possible options are presented that are named by Charles Perrow as:

artisan non-routine engineering routine

The bureaucratic organizational model contemplates only two possible options; those we have mentioned under b. and c. only. Under this conception Charles Perrow identifies two types of organizational arrangement in addition to Max Weber's scheme. And to show the differences of these different organizational types within a specific area, choose the educational one.

Locate in quadrant c. (routine) to custodial institutions, and within quadrant b. (non-routine) to an elite psychiatric agency. The two mixed types, where knowledge in one dimension shows ignorance in the other, are those under the a quadrant. (artisanal) as is the case of socializing institutions, while in quadrant d. (engineering) locates schools with scheduled instruction.

It is interesting to note that this particular vision of Charles Perrow questions some myths of organizational life, as is the case of individual creativity as something generalized. Perrow emphasizes that not all people prefer to have non-routine activities that are continuously modified, for which there are no results or clear feedback; not even the general management in companies prefers to operate in this type of situation. And for this reason “the bureaucratic model can even become - for routine situations - not only the most efficient model but also the most humane. In addition to paying attention to the organizational structure as a result of the prevailing technology,Perrow considers that context is also of singular importance and does not hesitate to make it known that “what appears as competition many times is not” (in oligopolistic situations and at the top of their respective different companies, leaders have more in common with your competitor than those that are not). And in addition to technology, context and structure, it takes into account the organizational “objectives” variable, for which it is suggested that the reader turn to Drucker's work in relation to management by objectives (MBO). See Peter Drucker: "The practice of management"; Harper & Row - 1954. Finally, it gives some consideration to the individual variable “by suggesting that the transcendence of the organizational leader is achieved when he takes into consideration aspects such as the organizational mission,the nature of it and its degree of response from the authoritarian bureaucratic organization that appears as something inevitable within a supposedly democratic society. "Schumacher, E. FritzFritz Schumacher had a very interesting trajectory in his life. He studied economics in England and the United States of America, and in recent years turned to agriculture - eventually becoming President of an organic agricultural organization - and journalism, his thoughts diverging from those of economists and political science professionals.. For Fritz Schumacher “small is beautiful” (“Small is beautiful: A study of economics as if People Mattered”; Blond and Briggs - 1973); to go after the great is to approach destruction ”, which makes it clear what he thinks about large corporations and large conglomerates. Some of Schumacher's main postulates are described below:It is not possible to solve the problems of man on the planet through industrial and / or mass production It is important to create small decentralized units that bring people together In those situations where it can only be produced on a large scale to be competitive, anyway can achieve "work from the small even within the large" Organizations need to work two-dimensionally focusing both on order and the exercise of freedom Use intensive technology in third world countries is absolutely meaningless Intermediate technologies should replace "technologies gigantic ”The change with intermediate technologies can be done in a smooth and moderate way,especially in third world countries where people are not used to a “high” transformational rate of change Organizations must be based where people live Large urban centers are not the best places for people to spend a significant part of their lives working It is not reasonable that those responsible for managing organizations have to move themselves and their family every three to five years as a result of a promotion or lateral displacement The creation of small and medium-sized entities that require very little capital investment for their launch should be facilitated in companies it must take into account mainly those materials that are easily available within the context in which the organization operates A technology "with a human face" is needed,"A non-violent technology" where there is no abuse of resources or people It is necessary to move away from the current production scheme where industrialized countries consume resources at very high rates As a consequence of his postulates and conceptual scheme E. Fritz Schumacher is encouraged to develop five principles for managing large corporations in order to orient them towards relatively autonomous business centers. They are:Fritz Schumacher is encouraged to develop five principles for managing large corporations in order to orient them towards relatively autonomous business centers. They are:Fritz Schumacher is encouraged to develop five principles for managing large corporations in order to orient them towards relatively autonomous business centers. They are:

the principle of the subsidiary function supported by the fact that no task should be developed in a higher hierarchy than where it is possible to be performed the principle of revenge where the subsidized unit must be protected against all kinds of reproach the principle of identification where the results of each of the results centers should be made visible the principle of motivation that suggests that all efforts should not be oriented towards replacing personal work by computer or automated equipment the principle of the axiom of the environment that maintains that it is not beneficial to treat of achieving compliance by one of two extremes: persuasion or detailed instructions

E. Fritz Schumacher is a strong follower of small organizations, since they can develop participatory schemes, relate efforts to rewards, and the owner develops his role in a natural and equitable way. In many medium-sized companies these virtues begin to fade and their contributions are not visible. Finally, in large corporations, the entity itself is nothing more than a fiction since it allows shareholders to live like parasites, predating what others work for. There is no doubt that above all for Schumacher “small is really beautiful”. See also: G. McRobie "Small is possible", Harper & Row - 1981. Whyte, William H.William H Whyte was born in 1917, he has been a journalist and a “curious” person regarding how people live in society. There is no doubt that his lucidity in observing organizational phenomena allows him to elucidate some of the dilemmas that people experience - especially the professional, managerial and directive body - within organizations. For Whyte, managers and directors live the conflict resulting from the traditional Protestant ethic and a new social ethic, which can lead to neurosis. Some characteristics that the directive and management group experience are: they begin to climb the pyramid as a result of their professional expertise, but over the years they must experience the frustrations of committee meetings, they hear that they must be sociable as they climb the organizational pyramid,.But this is not always true for his family and his group of friends, they bring work home, which negatively affects his relationship with his family, while during the day he spends a lot of time efficiently doing many things that are not necessary. over time it is difficult to have a balanced life as one makes progress in the organizational pyramid they want to control their own destinies (they are characterized by having "independence" plans… that they do not even put in place when they retire or retire) actually they are controlled by the organization… but they must appear to act freely they spend more and more hours at work and with work,It is from there that they derive their greatest and best satisfactions through the prevailing social ethics - which contrasts with the Protestant ethics - the management team believes that they are pursuing their interests when in reality the only interests to be satisfied are those of the organization the organization predominates On people always seeking consensus very close to mediocrity, they are recruited based on their creativity and initiative, but then they are parameterized in their behaviors, transforming them into "repetitive" and, if they are not lucky, they have to be fired - paradoxically - for their lack of initiative and innovation that they obviously lost as a result of their daily coexistence within the company These characteristics emerge to a large extent from the social ethic that is opposed to the Protestant ethic,being this ethics the one that provides an explanation and also justification for the pressures that society exerts on individuals. For William H. Whyte "The Organization Man"; Simon & Schuster - 1956) social ethics is made up of three basic propositions that complement and strengthen each other: scientism, belonging, and “acting together.” Social ethics makes students in the process of graduating from universities leave gradually moving away from the Protestant ethic and by the time it comes to enter a company, the influence of the company deals the final blow to the Protestant ethic. You are looking for a person well "rounded integrally" under social ethics. Personnel managers in companies and universities with business administration programs,they no longer require professionals to kill themselves working. Now they can play golf and it is not necessary to work so hard; even more so if they work long hours they are likely to be labeled as inefficient. The Protestant ethic has died and a new ethic that Whyte calls social emerges. “Management” has to begin to learn to live with these conflicts because if it does not do so, its work career may be interrupted and negatively affected (for more details it is suggested that the reader turns to the book by Dr. Donald Cole and Eric Gaynor titled "Professional Suicide or Organizational Murder."The "management" has to begin to learn to live with these conflicts because if it does not do so, its work career may be interrupted and negatively affected (for more details, it is suggested that the reader refer to the book by Dr. Donald Cole and Eric Gaynor entitled " Professional Suicide or Organizational Murder ”.The "management" has to begin to learn to live with these conflicts because if it does not do so, its work career may be interrupted and negatively affected (for more details, it is suggested that the reader refer to the book by Dr. Donald Cole and Eric Gaynor entitled " Professional Suicide or Organizational Murder ”.

Organizational Development and "The 7 Intelligences"

One of the questions that we are most frequently accompanied in workshops where we try to promote the growth of the community through business or organizational development, is the following: What do you need to promote the creation and sustainability of companies?

Private companies in particular, and within these SMEs, are the ones that are forced to compete. Public companies, both national, provincial and municipal, NGOs have funds at their disposal and their management has to do with “operating within budget”.

On the other hand, the subsidiaries of multinationals are overwhelmingly oligopolistic companies, and as a national businessman told us: “How easy it is to have a company (such as multinationals) where the product or service can usually only be sold by two or more others. three companies. On the other hand, SMEs have enormous competition and there are also “others” who are always attentive to introduce themselves as new players and competitors ”.

And the question related to the survival of these SMEs is usually associated with what it is necessary for the entrepreneur to "possess within himself" to be able to create, transit, compete, grow, consolidate and perhaps even sell his own organizational creation.

For about 30 years we have made reference to "The 7 Intelligences" that usually unfold within 3 main levels. The first of these is a survival kit and is related to Cognitive Intelligence, Emotional Intelligence, and Creative Intelligence. It is a necessary step for the creation and organizational development but it is not enough. In the best of cases, effective people in these 3 intelligences must be very good "at exploiting themselves," as a prestigious professional would tell us.

The second important step is made up of 3 other intelligences: Practical Intelligence that is linked to the instrumentality of products and services, Commercial Intelligence (entering, staying and exiting the commercialization of products and services) and Financial Intelligence that It is related to the distribution of resources within the organization (personnel, materials and equipment, among others) and outwards (suppliers, shareholders, source of financing, among others).

But what ultimately makes the difference and provides continued and sustained growth is the last rung that is composed of a single Intelligence: Organizational Intelligence. Mc Donald surely does NOT make the best hamburger in the world, but his income is remarkable; Babbage was the creator of the current computer but Thomas Watson has received many more benefits than Babbage within the same product line; and Henry Ford has had to give first place to General Motors Corporation for Alfred Sloan's Organizational Intelligence.

Taking into account that the development of "The 7 Intelligences" has to be dealt with during the first hours of the day tomorrow, and if it seems good to you, we would like to learn about the questions that the participants wish to ask and after them, give Today's session is over, taking into account that we are already on time.

Thank you very much for sharing!