IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ejn/ejbmjr/v8y2020i4p292-304.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of Organizational Theory in the Axis of the "Pandemonium" Metaphor in Modern, Symbolic and Postmodern Approaches

Author

Listed:
  • Ahmet Ilhan

    (Bayburt University, Turkey)

Abstract

The development and position of the field of organizational theory differ at certain levels depending on the perspectives emerging in different periods. It is thought that analyzing organizational theory in the context of different perspectives adds diversity to organizational research within the development line. In addition, the linguistic codes used in different periods to understand today's organizations and the discourses developed in this context are seen as valid features in understanding organizational structures and functioning. This study examines the organizations established based on the reflections of modern, symbolic and postmodern approaches in organizational theory in the pandemonium axis related to human life and its organization at the organizational level, and the issues that organizational theory focuses on. In this direction, the main purpose of the study is to analyze the fundamental philosophical differences that constitute modern, symbolic and postmodern approaches and their effects on organizations and organizational theory in the context of issues that epistemological, ontological, metaphor, organizational theory focuses on, nature of information and pandemonium metaphor. Within the scope of the study, as a result of the analysis of organization theory with the pandemonium metaphor as a field of study in social sciences, it was concluded that organizations had linear, symbolic in the modern period and nonlinear structures in the postmodern period with fundamental philosophical differences.

Suggested Citation

  • Ahmet Ilhan, 2020. "Comparison of Organizational Theory in the Axis of the "Pandemonium" Metaphor in Modern, Symbolic and Postmodern Approaches," Eurasian Journal of Business and Management, Eurasian Publications, vol. 8(4), pages 292-304.
    • Handle: RePEc:ejn:ejbmjr:v:8:y:2020:i:4:p:292-304
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://eurasianpublications.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/EJBM-8.4.2.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kenneth E. Boulding, 1956. "General Systems Theory--The Skeleton of Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 197-208, April.
    2. Pfeffer, Jeffrey, 1997. "New Directions for Organization Theory: Problems and Prospects," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195114348.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lu, Jinfeng & Dimov, Dimo, 2023. "A system dynamics modelling of entrepreneurship and growth within firms," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 38(3).
    2. Jin P. Gerlach & Ronald T. Cenfetelli, 2022. "Overcoming the Single-IS Paradigm in Individual-Level IS Research," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(2), pages 476-488, June.
    3. George Kleiner, 2015. "State — Region — Field— Enterprise: Framework of Economics System Stability of Russia. Part 1," Economy of region, Centre for Economic Security, Institute of Economics of Ural Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, vol. 1(2), pages 50-58.
    4. Avner Engel & Shalom Shachar, 2006. "Measuring and optimizing systems' quality costs and project duration," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(3), pages 259-280, September.
    5. Justin R. Hall & Selen Savas-Hall & Eric H. Shaw, 2023. "A deductive approach to a systematic review of entrepreneurship literature," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 73(3), pages 987-1016, September.
    6. Peter Dobers & Lars Strannegård & Rolf Wolff, 2000. "Union‐Jacking the research agenda. A study of the frontstage and backstage of Business Strategy and the Environment 1992–1998," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(1), pages 49-61, January.
    7. Scherhag, Christian & Boenigk, Silke, 2010. "Relationship Fundraising: Stand der empirischen Forschung, theoretischer Bezugsrahmen und zukünftige Forschungsfelder," ZögU - Zeitschrift für öffentliche und gemeinwirtschaftliche Unternehmen, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 33(4), pages 354-367.
    8. Y. Sekou Bermiss & Benjamin L. Hallen & Rory McDonald & Emily C. Pahnke, 2017. "Entrepreneurial beacons: The Yale endowment, run‐ups, and the growth of venture capital," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(3), pages 545-565, March.
    9. Sarah Lister, 2000. "Power in partnership? An analysis of an NGO's relationships with its partners," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(2), pages 227-239.
    10. Masechaba Nthunya & Nien-Tsu Tuan & Corrinne Shaw & Ian Jay, 2017. "A Systemic Exploration of Lesotho’s Basic Education through Interactive Management," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 257-276, June.
    11. Barile, Sergio & Carrubbo, Luca & Iandolo, Francesca & Caputo, Francesco, 2013. "From 'EGO' to 'ECO' in B2B relationships," jbm - Journal of Business Market Management, Free University Berlin, Marketing Department, vol. 6(4), pages 228-253.
    12. M C Jackson, 2009. "Fifty years of systems thinking for management," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(1), pages 24-32, May.
    13. Andreas Hieronymi, 2013. "Understanding Systems Science: A Visual and Integrative Approach," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(5), pages 580-595, September.
    14. Luoma, Jukka, 2016. "Model-based organizational decision making: A behavioral lens," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 816-826.
    15. Youngcheoul Kang & Nakbum Choi & Seoyong Kim, 2021. "Searching for New Model of Digital Informatics for Human–Computer Interaction: Testing the Institution-Based Technology Acceptance Model (ITAM)," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(11), pages 1-36, May.
    16. David C. Lane, 2022. "Fons et origo: reflections on the 60th anniversary of Industrial Dynamics," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 38(3), pages 292-324, July.
    17. George Kleiner, 2015. "State — Region — Field — Enterprise: Framework of Economics System Stability of Russia. Part 2," Economy of region, Centre for Economic Security, Institute of Economics of Ural Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, vol. 1(3), pages 9-17.
    18. Zhanna Belyayeva, 2011. "Transformation processes of the corporate development in Russia: corporate social responsibility," Economy of region, Centre for Economic Security, Institute of Economics of Ural Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, vol. 1(1), pages 137-142.
    19. Dimov, Dimo & Pistrui, Joseph, 2024. "Dynamics of entrepreneurial well-being: Insights from computational theory," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    20. Stephens, William & Hess, Tim, 1999. "Systems approaches to water management research," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 3-13, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ejn:ejbmjr:v:8:y:2020:i:4:p:292-304. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Esra Barakli (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.