Created 25/12/2011 9:58:21 AM

Burrell and Morgan (1979) have a remarkable contribution to topic of my study in their book: Sociological paradigms and organizational analysis. They have based their debate on these quadrants that sociology: (a) Is reality given or a product of the mind? (b) Must one experience something to understand it? (c) Do humans have “free will”, or are they determined by their environment? (d) Is understanding best achieved through the scientific method or through direct experience?

They have merged these debates into two fundamental issues: (a) Social theories emphasizing regulation and stability vs. those emphasizing radical change; (b) Subjective (individualistic) theories vs. objective (structural) theories. In this way they represented four paradigms:

Functionalist Paradigm (objective-regulation):  It assumes rational human action and believes one can understand organizational behavior through hypothesis testing.

Interpretive Paradigm (subjective-regulation): It “seeks to explain the stability of behavior from the individual’s viewpoint.”

Radical Humanist Paradigm (subjective-radical change): Theorists in this paradigm are mainly concerned with releasing social constraints that limit human potential.

Radical Structuralist Paradigm (objective-radical change): Theorists see inherent structural conflicts within society that generate constant change through political and economic crises.

We can also learn major assumptions about social science in Burrell and Morgan’s work (1979). There have been two major intellectual traditions. The first is “sociological positivism”, which applies models and methods from the natural sciences to social affairs. The second is “German idealism”, which sees reality in the “spirit” or “idea” and rejects the scientific methodology to understanding behavior.

Coming back to our futurist debate, I found this great in Dennis Morgan’s view: “The progressive image of the future solidified and emerged to embrace the world in the globalization movement — the new thesis of a new era. At the same time, an antithesis has been in the early stages of conception and development — a new utopian image of the future as the vision of postindustrial and postmodern global society based upon sustainable global development, systems theory, global consciousness and an ecological and futures ethic.” (Morgan, 2002).

References:

Burrell, G. and Morgan, G (1979). Sociological paradigms and organizational analysis: Elements of the sociology of corporate life, Portsmouth, NH: Heinmann. Summary available at: http://faculty.babson.edu/krollag/org_site/org_theory/Scott_articles/burrell_morgan.html

Morgan, D. (2002). Images of the future: a historical perspective, Futures, 34, pp. 883–893.