AT THE CROSSROADS OF PARADIGMS: MEXICAN ORGANIZATIONS IN TRANSITION.
José G. Vargas, M.B.A.; Ph. D.
Research professor
Centro Universitario del Sur
Universidad de Guadalajara
Cerrada Petronilo López 31
Cd. Guzmán, Jalisco, 49000, México
Organizations are live systems, oriented toward a trend of self-organized patterns, structures and processes which respond to demands of a complex and turbulent, changing environment through constant and permanent learning. The learning capacity of organizations is a determinant factor in their survival under conditions of uncertainty and complexity. Organizations that have survived are those capable either of learning for adaptation or learning for generation (Senge, 1990) of the new situations and forces derived of human evolution and according to the development of new paradigms or frames of reference and models of thought which allow us to understand and explain the new emerging reality of organizations.
There is not a permanent paradigm in economic, social, cultural and scientific evolution. The human being has evolved through different stages of evolution which have been called the waves of human evolution by some authors. What follows is an intent of comprising these different stages of human development.
THE WAVES OF HUMAN DEVELOPMENT.
WAVE PERIOD CHARACTERISTICS.
________________________________________________________________________
I.-PRE-MODERN ORGANIZATIONS
Agriculture Sedentarism.
Development of great cultures and civilizations
________________________________________________________________________
II.-MODERN ORGANIZATIONS
Industrial Automatization
Increment of production
Quality standard
Machinism (machines do not have feelings).
Technologicals (Joseph Schumpeter)
1790-1840 Steam machine, motor of industrial revolution
1840-1890 Expansion of railways networks
1890-1930 Electrical energy impulse production.
1930-1980 Oil moves industry.
Development of automovil industry.
________________________________________________________________________
III.-POSMODERN ORGANIZATIONS
Information 1980- ? Wide and inmediate knowledge availability
for decision making processes.
Complexity and uncertainty.
Development of telematics
Digital economy
Technology of high complexity
Electronic workplace
Electronic marketplace
Global organizations
New systems of labor organization.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Creativity 1990-? Innovation in solution of problems
Engineering of ideas.
Fractal organizations
________________________________________________________________________
Each wave of human development implies its own paradigm. The old formulations of past success are not the guaranty of future success. Thus, paradigms are ideal patterns, frameworks of reference and fundamental suppositions which thinkers and doers gravitate around during certain period of time as the only one best way, until it reaches obsolecence and a new paradigm (paradogma?) emerges creating an instructive movement which implies a principle that had always existed but nobody had recognized before and can include old conceptions in a more ample and superior set of ideas.
Just to give an idea of how paradigms work in organizations, De laCerda (1993) cites the answer of John Sculley, resuscitater of Pepsi-Cola and Apple, to the question ¿How is a thir vawe enterprise?: " a vital sign is the use of space, work in open spaces, with flexibility to reorganize and quickly adapt to changes. In these entreprises are replaced the old hierarquical model by a network without center. More than an structure it relates to a process compounded by modular groups more flexibles than previous departments. Changes the leader's role: inspirator, follower and coordinator of an infinite process where outstands talent and ideas".
A new paradigm can often be premature and ahead of its time, as Stent (1972) contends and frequently challenges the Status Quo and the stablishment, creates resistances, rejection feelings and causes pain among the inviduals which still priviledge the old patterns. For any human being it means a lot of strain to pass from one true and reality to another new ones, from one frame of reference of his own life to another one with a new meaning for himself.
However, hostorically I would contend that the pre-modern period of Mexican organizations corresponds to the indigenous civilizations that have flourishesd before the conquest of the Anáhuac Valley, during the pre-Cortesian (Cortés was the conqueror of México), pre-colonial period. Thus, modernism in organizations came with the Spaniards who conquered Mexico, in 1521, although it does not corresponds to the industrial development, they brought the germs of pre-nationalist and bureaucratic organizations and traditions.
During three Centuries of colonial period, from 1521 and until 1821, México had been a country of peasants, always subordinated to Metropolitan decisions and ruled by centralized and authoritarian institutions and organizations, always monopolizing the true as a mean of Mexican human lives' control, like the Spanish Crown, the Catholic Chuch, etc. Industrialization of México started as late as this Century, after the World Warr II, although there had been some intentions in the eighteenth hundreds, after the Independence of Mexico from Spain in 1521, which marked a period of searching for Mexican national and institutional identities: the Mexican State.
After the Mexican Revolution, Mexico as a country had been an inward-looking proud of a Mexican nationalism which gave rise to a modern state institutions. Thus, truely speaking, the modern Mexican organizations began in 1946 under the Presidency of Alemán, when industrialization had received a notoriuos impulse, which in turn had stimulated the modernization of economic, social and political institutions. The economic model
Modernity is a new era and new mentality which priviledges the "reason", as the last parameter of human activities and gives the capacity to human beings to think by themselves as the principal motor of an unlimited human progress and to convert them in the masters of the Universe. "Rationality" is able to develop perfect organizational systems. Modernism in organizations is identified with the notion of "mechanical time", where lineal mentality allowed to recognized past events to projet future scenarios, and later, when change processes accelerated, an exponential mentality was needed, to understand the different variables of trends.
Modern organizations have the intention to "rationalize" the work flows and processes through differentiation of specific functions and tasks, always looking for quantitative growth measured in terms of achieving results in money, influence, power, etc. This rationalist modernism is also expressed in separation of labour and familiar settings to avoid potential conflicts between the two environments. From an another point of view, Simon (1989) sustains that the rationality of organizations in such areas as decision making is limited with small capacities and few abilities of human mind for formulation and solution of complex problems.
However, I would argue that the prescription of separation of labour and familiar settings has not been followed entirely by Mexican organizations which can appreciate the high cultural value that give to family issues. There is sustantial evidences to sustain this fact. Also, Mexican modern organizations considered as a means to optimization and rationalization of resources and operations have not always achieved satisfactory results.
Modern organizations in Mexico are based on three main componentes: strategy, structure and systems which give them strength, consistency and resistance as characteristics of bureaucratic organizations. Just to have an idea "about the work going on in Mexico to create bureaucracies", Dr. Cole (1984) narrates an anecdote when he was searching for people doing organization development (OD) in México, he located a representative of Société pour le Développement des Organizations (SIDO). Dr. Cole (1984) explains: "When asked if there was an OD network in Mexico, he replied, "No, we do not have many OD people in Mexico because Mexico is a pre-industrial society. We are in the business of creating bureacuracies, not getting rid of them". He later Added," continuous explaining Dr. Cole: "OD is the product of an affluent society. OD is inappropriate for a developing country like Mexico".
This way of conceptualizing modern Mexican organizations is based on the model of considering the organization as a machine, a conceptualization that comes from the the Taylorism. A research conducted by De laCerda and Nuñez (1990), reported also in De laCerda (1993), who analyzed 40 published studies on Mexican organizational traits and characteristics between 1965 and 1985 found that Mexican organizations were predominantly:
"Managerial assigment based on familiar interests and links, very stratified organizational structures, distance between hierarchical levels, promotion by relations rather than performance, centralization of authority and decisions in power positions, emphasis on status and managerial image, individual work and frank distrustful to work in a team, localist vision, passive vision of time, low sense of planning, emphasis in short term, informative speculation, productivity based on volume, low consciuosness of quality, indirect and closed communication between hierachical levels, desinterest in development and learning of personnel, isolation of activities and procedures, lack of follow up to plans and activities, low orientation towards market, lack of objetives knowledge, untrust and fear to change".
Although the research methodology can be seriously questionned, their findings are confirmed by later research of Camarena Y Lasso who concluded the localist vision and good relations as a means for promotion in Mexican organizations, and Kras (1991) have found the centralized trend and lack of skill to delegate, lack of subordinate's development and lack of planning and performance follow-ups. However, these reseachers have reported also the transitional steps toward more postmodern characteristics and traits of Mexican organizations.
A more recent study of Mexican organizations done by Colunga (1993) revise the principles under which they have been modeled:
1).- Strong enphasys on the production apparatus and ignoring persons.
2).- An abuse of systematization, specialization and departamentalization, which
in the long term results in rigidity.
3).- Less attention to the importance of personal feelings in production.
4).- Market conceptualization as extrange concept to management.
5).- Perception of society and government only as obstacles of operation.
Suddenly, Mexican organizations awaken up to a new reality: globalization of organizations which propose new forms of work organization and new principles of management. From being an inward-looking country, Mexico adopted the new economic startegy: commercial liberation for a more competitive market and an open economy. In 1986 Mexico became member of the World Commerce Organization (WCO), formerly General Agreement Trade and Tariffs (GATT) and signed commercial agreements with Chile, Costa Rica, Colombia, Venezuela and Bolivia during the first years of the nineties, but The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) represents a new era of develoment for Mexican organizations. It had started the First of January of 1994 challenging competitiveness of Mexican institutions and organizations with their other partners, Canadian and United States' well developed organizations.
Recounting the importance of these events, they represent the fall of modernism in Mexican organizations and the transition into the posmodern world by decree. The implications of this commercial liberation in the new strategies and orientations of Mexican organizations had been derived by Nosnik (1993) in the following factors:
1).- Quality of products and services which define the organizational mission.
2).- Integration, training and leadership of team work, and
3).- Searching for better ways and factors which contibute adding value to customer's
needs satisfaction.
There is some evidence that Mexican organizations, under these environmental conditions, had been in transition from the modern paradigm toward a post-modern model. Kras (1991), for example, has reported these organizational changes such as the counsciusness of quality ann market orientation, planning of organizational efforts, strategic thinking, control and follow-up through performance appraisal, participation of personnel, team work, training and development of human resources, technology counsciousness and practice, transmission of improvement and participation values.
However, the way it has been applied NAFTA, have resulted in the destruction of modern organizations, indigenous industries and social actors, giving way to a brutal economic, social and political crisis. Some analysts like Hirst and Thompson (1966), Husson (1996), and Rodríguez Araujo (1997), contend that although Mexico is partner of NAFTA and thus, part of the commercial area of the North, still belongs to the South scheme, as it is shown by its increasingly poorly rural sector, the tendency toward bankruptcy of small and medium sized companies, the increasing and withouth control informal economics, the indigenous poverty, etc. Since 1988 some sectors of the manufacturing industry have been registering desinvestment and had became a main cornerstone to prop up the actual foreign-oriented growth strategy, and therefore NAFTA has priviledged the development of transnational companies and a few large national firms.
In terms of Husson (1996), "the notion of unequal development and combined is perfectly applied to contemporary capitalism. The dialectics fractionization/ integration in fact appears as the main movement of global economy...but has lost its capacity to deeply extend its logic to social stratus and geographical areas, exercising a systematic isolation and rejecting anything else that does not have success to integrate to its logic".
Still, the acceptance of regionalism in México had had a strong influence in commercial policies and suggests, as has been already recognized by the OCDE (1996), some questions about commercial coherence and distortions, the administrative costs of overlaped regional agreements and the rol Mexico plays in the multilateral commercial system. The efforts of Mexican government in commercial and investment issues -privatization, desregulation, making agile commerce and the initiatives of competence policies, can be considered according to the OCDE (1996), "a pack of market competencies", which will in turn foster new organizational arrangements. The actual administration has centered its strategies more on state and municipal desregulation, where there are still a lot of regulatory and bureaucratic barriers to the activities of private organizations, and the results are still to be seen and evaluated.
All these economic, political and social changes are toward a post-nationalist institutions which is coming together with postmodernism in corresponding organizations. It is not easy to describe the impact of posmodernism in Mexican organizations and maybe the underlying characteristic could be perpexity as Spokoiny (1997) argues when sustains that the post-industrial era has overthrown the social projects and utopias of modernity and has left a vacuum that an infinity of contradictory propositions struggling each other without any success to fill it, in what he calls the "zapping culture" and " of inmediate, fugacity culture" consisting of a multiplicity of propositions and offers that are not self-excluded, fed by constant changes in consumer patterns which priviledge massive e impersonal channels and technology-based networks which in turn are changing association and socialization patterns of human groups, modalities of work and understanding of a virtual reality.
The postmodern world seems to have diluted sense and trascendent meaning that existence had not only in the traditional world but in the field of modern social utopias. However, some authors like Fernández Santillán (1996) considers that posmodernism is an antimodern trend among other theories that have been offered deceively as state of the art, but of decadent reality, such as the nihilism, radical relativism, eskepticism, disenchanted realism, pragmatism, or simply the reivindication of more rampant conservadurism. In a few words, this is a world of partial and subjective identities. Paraphrasing Kundera, the post-modern world is the world of freeways while the traditional world was a world of roads. Roads, paths have disappeared from human mind even before scenary disappeareance. Life of modern human has became a freeway, an intrascedent space to be followed by the best "efficiency" possible.
Thus, with the arriving of posmodernism in Mexican organizations, the basic ideas of modernism are not more valid if organizations want to become competitive in a more interdependent and globalized world, as Serralde (1994a) assures, suddenly organizations are passing from an epoch when in order to belong to the system, it was necessary to accept the rules, to a new era when the systems has been sobordinated to the force of individual differences. Reivindication movements of diverse groups are claiming their rights are affecting not anly existential definitions of organizations but behavioral patterns, and the fleeting true of reality has posed a checkmate to the bureaucratic organization while flexibilizing processes of decision making and dissemining the power centers incorporating individual's visions and talents to a corporate one.
However, posmodernism has inherited chaos, conflict and fractality. Radhakrishnan (1994) summarized that Postmodernism "is the expression of a profound contradition: deterritorialization and a borderless world on the one hand, and, on the other, the return of nationalism and the exacerbation of the gap between the 'developed' and the 'underdeveloped' worlds." Citing Lyotard (1984), three important gestures of posmodernity are:
1).- It was a condition. (ontological meaning). This "condition is real, and has been
theorized into lexical significance within the First World well before the
underdeveloped world could even take a look at, leave alone have a say in, its
ideological determination".
2).- Epistemology and knowledege significance. The epistemic condiction is its
simultaenity as both a regional and a global phenomenon. "The epistemic location
of posmodernity, given the dominance of the West, has a virtual hold over the rest
of the World also. If modernity functions as a structure-in-dominance that regulates
and normativizes the relationship between the West and the Rest, postmodernism,
despite the so called break from modernity, sustains and prolongs this realtionship",
adds Radhakrishnan (1994).
3).- A phenomena of advanced capitalist, post-industrial computarized societies, although
"the theoretical need to take postmodernity seriously becomes an impretaive even
in places where postmodernity is not a lived reality, i.e. has not historical roots.
The Third World is then compulsorily interpellated by posmodernity even though
its own realities are thoroughly out of sync with the temporality of the posmodern."
Thus, although postmodernism is a main stream in developed societies, this stream drags Mexican organizations that have closer contacts with organizations of these post industrial societies. If modernity of modern organizations is related to the bureaucratic model proposed by Max Weber, postmodern organizations are rejecting such principles under which is based such model, as Clegg (1990) affirms.
Thus, one characteristic of postmodernism in organizations can be identified with fractal realities which in turn requires a flexible mentality and human action under a lively dimensions of space and time. Posmodernism is forcing organizations to rescue human beings from bureaucratic structures, contends Serralde (1994a,b) in such a way that the time has come when the organization sciences must question themselves to be liberated from any kind of dogmas and close gaps with their own realities. Postmodernism, argues Radhakrishnan (1994), "travels the world over in the name of knowledge, theory and epistemology". The principles under which posmodern, fractal organizations are sustained, according to Serralde (1994a, b), are:
1).- Human systems are imperfect.
2).- Plurality and ambigüity are constant.
3).- The states of exclusivity are not permanent.
4).- Chaos is the best ontological representation of liberty.
5).- True is fleeting.
6).- Where there is human activity there exists deterioration.
7).- Actions of human being are not always necessarily the syntesis of his antecedents.
Management of post-modern organizations do not have any formal organization chart to represent the traditional separation of persons (employees and managerial staff) by different and specialized functions (finances, human resources, production, marketing, research and development, etc), instead of which there is a trend toward personification of whom gives services and whom receives them, based on simplicity of a bureaucratic process and facilitating closeness among people, stressing a person oriented, horizontal managerial style more than function or task oriented. Thus, de-differentiation of work and processes is the main characteristic of post-modern organizations.
Mexican organizations are inmerse in a changing environment and therefore, subject to these new conditions, which are defining the new components under which must be designed.
According to Colunga (1993) these conditions are:
1).- The abrupt Mexican economic openess process and its incorporation to two of the
most developed and competitive economies of the world.
2).- Vanguard Mexican firms are changing dramatically their organization.
3).- Actual technology systems, most of them imported, are being designed according
to the trends in new managerial principles.
4).- Some of Mexican companies are implementing Post-Taylorian managerial
techniques.
5).- Some new and fresh leadership styles are observed to be exercised by some
Mexican directors.
The four componentes of post-modern Mexican organizations, according to Guerrero, are the culture style, thinking way of people, what they do best and complementary objectives they pursue. Culture style, for example, is not necessarily deterministic of unsuccessful organizations and unchangeable, as it has been conceptualized under the modern paradigm. Culture in organizations is a dynamic process and can change as a result of environmental forces.
In order to better understand the differences between the modern and post-modern paradigms of organizations, the following tables show some of the characteristics of each one.
CHARACTERISTICS OF MODERN AND POSMODERN ORGANIZATIONS
________________________________________________________________________
CHARACTERISTIC MODERNISM POSMODERNISM
Bureaucratic Fractal and flexible
________________________________________________________________________
Identification With "being" With might being
Emphasis Efficiency Effectiveness
Structure In function of designer's In function of market needs.
believes.
Inflormation flow Restricted Open
Resources allocation By decree Flexible
Focus of power Centralized in hierarchy Centralized in knowledge
and experience.
Capability Managerial limited General excedent
Orientation Toward product Toward market
Processes Routines and traditions Leading edge technologies
Work interactios Formal committes as agents Multidisciplinary groups as
of institutuonalization permanent change agents.
________________________________________________________________________
Table based in characterization of organizations by Serralde (1994).
The first part of the Twentieth Century, according to Crozier (1989), organizations were identified as the art of doing great things with mediocre people and sophisticated structures and procedures, while today such art has changed toward professionalization of members.
MODEL OF DIFFERENCES BETWEEN MODERN AND POST-MODERN ORGANIZATIONS
________________________________________________________________________
MODERN POST-MODERN
________________________________________________________________________
Reasoning Emotions and feelings
Formality Informality
Distinction There is not distinction.
Persons speak with respect Persons speak without any respect.
Vertical structures Horizontal and flat structures
Rigidity in process decision making Flexibility in process desicion making
Action oriented problem solutions
"Superman" theory (Only the chief thinks) Work teams
Closed communication Open communication
Lag behind technology Leading edge technology
Technological determinism Micro-electronic equipments
Scientific perspective Innovations
Third world structures Tecnopolis
Rational organizations Spontaneous organizations´
Tasks differentiation and devaluated Multiple habilities of task varieties
Task specialization Multifuntional
Task assigments Process assigments
Short range planning Long range planning because the relative
stability
Focus on surviving Globalization as a vision
Are not very competitive Are extremely competitive
Capital erosion based on excesive debt Atraction of investments
Loyalty to inmediate superviser Predominant self-loyalty
Reduce the hierarquical pyramid
Traditional marketing Social marketing
Massive comsuming Niches.
Product of quality Identify customer needs for customer
satisfaction
Traditional controls of quality verification Highly developed control and verifica-
tion procedures
Operators separeted by antagonism Friendship between operators
Employer-employees labour relations Subcontracting and work at home
Employees designation Personnel involvement
Inform, reward and motivate
Measure and appraisal of results
Rewards of performance
External quality Internal and external quality
External clients There are external and internal clients.
Maximization of contacts client-suppliers
Fear to change Restlessness and implementation of change
Information and training of collaborators
Persons are called "collaborators"
Hierarchies well marked Limits between and within organizations
are erased
Authority is not delegated Delegation of authority and responsabili-
ties.
Lack of direction Recruiting, human resources development
Authocratic leadership Democratic-liberal leadership
Organizational leadership
Top management committment
Adoption of a new cultural organization
Complex process Simplification of processes
Process reingeneering
Redesign of clue processes
External contarcting
Not environmental considerations Environmental considerations
Disdain for environment Pollution centers, waste treatment
Scarse critical capacity Maximize customer contacts
________________________________________________________________________
The new principles for post modern organizations proposed by Crozier (1989), are:
1).- Simplicity as a response to complexity.
2).- Autonomy of operators as a need that organizations have and meaning that the
operators have liberty and take full responsability of they elections.
3).- An organization cultured driven and supported by a new set of values and
believes.
Based on these principles, changes from modern design of organizations to posmodernist organizations can follow these steps:
1).- A step from "scarse" values to "safety" values.
2).- Less efficiency and acceptance of bureaucratic authority, and rejection to any
expression of formal authority.
3).- High rejection of "Western model" and the colapse of Socialist utopia.
4).- More importance to individual freedom and emotional experience.
5).- Science prestige, technology and "rationality" are diminishing.
One report of studies conducted on Mexican organizations by De laCerda (1993) taking into consideration twenty pairs of interrelated variables have given different combinations of managerial practices according to the tipes of organizations which can be identified in traditional or bureaucratic in one extreme and competitive advanced in the other extreme, and between them the organizations in transition.
________________________________________________________________________
TRADITIONAL TRANSITION COMPETITIVE
BUREAUCRATIC ADVANCED
________________________________________________________________________
Structure Strategy
Procedures Systems
Activities Processes
Individual work Team work
Centralization, hierarchy Participation, delegation
Local vision Global vision
Firm's internal interests Interests client-market
Short term Long term
Expenses, costs Income, generation
Loss and break even point Profits, capital gains
Security Opportunities
Tradition, stability Change and innovation
Intuition Information
Particular values Shared values
Improvización Constancy
Functional stability Flexibility
Work specialization Multifunctionality
Separation think-do Integration think-do
Effort Results
Instruction, training. Learning.
________________________________________________________________________
Table based on studies conducted by De laCerda (1993).
TRANSITIONAL LOGIC.
TRADITIONAL (OLD). TRANSITIONAL (NEW)
Domestic markets Global markets
Get new customers Keep existing customers
Tell the customer Ask the customer
Company driven Customer driven
Tall structures Flat structures
Reduce variable costs Reduce fixed costs
Independent functions Integrated functions
Managers Leaders
Detect errors Prevent errors
Inspect rejects out Design quality in
Product quality Process quality
Correct problems Prevent problems
Breakdown maintenance Preventive maintenance
Haigh quality/high cost High quality/low cost
Technology focus People focus
Specialists Multi-functional workers
Individual-based Team-based
Managers solve problems Workers solve problems
Large lot sizes Small lot sizes
Process layouts Workflow layouts
Resource utilization Throughput
Local databases Shared databases
Cost minimization Value maximization
Status quo Continuous improvements
Restructuring Reingeneering
Source: Tersine, Richard; Harvey, Michael and Buckley Michael (1997). "Shifting organizational paradigms: Transitional management." European Management Journal Vol. 15, No.1, p. 56.
Conclusions.
Posmodernity is a new expression of philosophic, ontological, methodological, scientific, artistical, political, social, economic, etc. trends, and thus a new mentality which set limits and deficiencies on modern expresions.
Post-modernity is the sign of the new times, an outcome of changing trends in all areas of human life, the irruption of new social, political, cultural and economic values which are provoking tremedous human behavioral changes in organizations. In order to survive, organizations need to learn to live according to the development of this new paradigm.
Postmodern paradigm of massive and bureaucratic Mexican organizations must be reviewed to provide frameworks of reference for more personal identity, intimacy and significative human contact. Profoundity, tact and flexibility are three human virtues which permeates the organizational behaviors and creates a peculiar organizational cultures. New methodological options, techniques and practices need to be developed to achieve organizational competitiveness.
The coming new milenium will witness a generation of Mexican organizations well adapted to changes of environmental forces, reducing the levels of uncertainty and complexity with the arisal of a new set of cultural values in a more democratic and participative society. Design of organizations -structure, behaviors and processes- according to the emerging paradigm will allow more economic competitiveness which in turn, may contribute to sustancially increase the levels of quality of life, productivity and effectiveness. However, Mexicans urgently need to learn how to change some cultural and managerial practices in order to live within the emerging organizational paradigm.
Otherwise it will be only a new utopia.
References.
Camarena, Jorge y Lasso, Pablo. Hacia un estilo propio de dirección de empresas.
Washington, D.C.
Clegg, Stewart. (1990). Modern organizations, Sage, London.
Cole, Donald W. (1984). "Global organization development: the application of
organization development technologies to global problems." Leardership and
Organization Development Journal, 5, 4.
Colunga Dávila, Carlos (1993). "La administración mexicana ante el mercado
internacional de fines del siglo", Management Today en español, junio.
Crozier, Michel (1989). L'enterprise a l'ecoute, apprendre le management post industriel.
Intereditions, Paris.
De laCerda Gastélum, Jose. (1993) "Una nueva generación de administradores
mexicanos", Management Today en español, mayo.
De laCerda G., José and Nuñez, Francisco (1990). La administración en desarrollo:
Problemas y avances de la administración en México. México: Hacheté-ITESO, 1990.
Fernández Santillán, José (1996). "La sombra del Porfiriato", Este País, número 69,
diciembre.
Guerrero M. Luis. "Seminario de filosofía empresarial".
Hirst, Paul y Thompson, Grahame (1996). Globalization in question (The international
economy and the possibilities of governance), Londres, Polity Press.
Kras, Eva (1991). La administración mexicana en transición. Iberomaericana.
Husson, Michel (1996). Misére du capital, Une critique du néolibéralisme, París, Syros.
Lyotard, Jean Francois (1984). The postmodern condition (translated by Geoff
Bennington and Brian Massumi). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Nosnik, Abraham (1993). "La transformación cultural de la gerencia mexicana",
Management Today en español, mayo.
OCDE (1996). Trade liberalization policies in México, OCDE, París, 1996.
Radhakrishnan, R. (1994). "Postmodernism and the rest of the world", Organization,
Volume 1(2).
Rodríguez Araujo, Octavio (1997). "¿Mundialización económica?, ¿Nuevo
imperialismo?", Este País, 58, enero de 1997.
Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline, Doubleday, New York, NY.
Serralde, Alejandro. (1994a). "Hacia la organización flexible; el nuevo habitat del ser
humano libre", Management Today en español, mayo de 1994.
Serralde S., Alejandro. (1994b). "Gerencia fractal: el enfoque para la posmodernidad",
Management Today en Español, diciembre de 1994.
Simon, Herbert A. (1989). Naturaleza y límites de la razón humana. Fondo de Cultura
Económica, México.
Spokoiney, Andrés. (1997). "El posmodernismo, las megatendencias y la práctica
profesional comunitaria", Hacia el futuro, http://www.leatid.com/spokoiny.html.
Stent, G.S. (1972). "Prematurity and uniqueness in scientific discovery", Scientific
American, Vol. 227.