Contradictions Organizational Theory

Contradictions to the Organizational Theory There exists a series of theories that compete with the organizational theory, and these notions are both contributive as well as pessimistic to the progression of the public sector organizations. The Marxian approach is referenced as one of the contradictions to the organizational theory as it outlines various aspects that oppose the theory’s ways of operation (Schulz 2001, p.12). According to Schulz (2001, p.12), the theory highlights that productivity and social affiliations in production should be spelled out based on the activities embraced by a respective institute to organize its transactions as well as the nature of the organization itself. Indicatively, Schulz (2001, p.12) notes that the

Shah (2011, p.16) highlights that splitting of work roles is salient in ensuring that individuals specialized in a specific areas are able to exemplify their skills in those areas, the costs affiliated with the movement of laborers from one role to another are countered, and lastly the allowance or the countering of replacement of human labor with technology-based labor. Fundamentally, the presence of progressed technological aspects should automatically translate to the elevation of the labor skills of the individuals in the specific areas (Braverman 1974, p.67). These views also introduce their shortcomings and as Braverman (1974, p.67) highlighted, the split of labor roles can cap the depression of innovation, the countering of progressive acts, and accelerate the depression of the morale of these individuals. In this regard, as noted by Braverman, managing strategy in the public sector organizations demand that creation of opportunities where employees can dispense aid to those who are unfamiliar with some aspects of performance restrain the solidity of the job structures (p.71).
Shah (2011, p.4) claims that theory was formulated based on the progression of the means of operation, and it was referenced as the modernization theory, which in a nutshell makes considerations on the most

399). This theory factors in the aspects of an organization being in a restraint environment while it is necessitated to solve a problem, which infers that an organization ought to lower the influences of external and internal changes in order to ensure stability to heighten performance. According to Van de Ven, Ganco, and Hinings (2013, p. 404), the contingency theory presents the notions that organizations have no standard or exemplary means of being structured or being managed; therefore, any structure enforced should be founded on the situation that the organization is experiencing. Cognizant of Ven et al.’s (2003, p.25) claim, the extensiveness of the organization, the culture of laborers besides the parallelism that exist in resource presence and means of transactions inhibit the formulation of standard means of