INTERCONEXIUNEA ORGANIZAȚIEI ȘI ORGANIZĂRII ÎN DINAMICA LIBERTĂȚILOR UMANE
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10680386Keywords:
framing, principalship, organizationAbstract
Interconnection of organization and framing in the dynamics of human freedoms.
This article delves into the fundamental principles underlying the concepts of organization and structure. Defining organization proves challenging as the available terminology falls short in capturing its complexity. Terms like ‚organization’ may be interchangeable with entity, connection, mechanism, social complex, mode of administration, and more. However, relying solely on synonyms is inadequate in these instances, often leading to a web of circular definitions. Many ideas tend to gravitate towards synonymous or circular explanations. Therefore, gaining a deeper understanding of the pivotal concepts in contemporary society—organization and structure—becomes imperative for conceptual clarity. In exploring these concepts, we navigate through a landscape that transcends mere linguistic synonyms, striving for a comprehensive comprehension of their multifaceted nature.
References
• COVACI, M., Cultura organizațională ca negentropie, Școala Națională de Studii Politice și Administrative. Teză de doctorat, 2019.
• CULDA, L., Organizațiile, București, Licorna, 1999.
• DRUCKER, P. F., Post-capitalist Society, Oxford, Butterworth-Heinemann, 1993.
• GIBSON, J. L. et al., Organizations. Behavior, Structure, Processes (ed. 14). New York, The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2012.
• GREENFIELD, B. T., Organizations as social inventions. Symposium on Developing Effective Educational Organizations: Concepts, Realities and Strategies for Change (p. 30). New Orleans: Greenfield Department of Educational Administration. Ontario, Institute for Studies in Education, 1973.
• HERNES, T., Understanding Organization as Process: Theory for a Tangled World. Routledge, 2008.
• KEYTON, J., Communication and organizational culture: a key to understanding work experiences. Thousand Oaks, California, Sage Publications, 2005.
• LUHMANN, N., Social Systems (Writing Science), Stanford University Press,1995.
• MARSHALL, G., Oxford. Dictionar de sociologie, București, Univers Enciclopedic. 2003.
• MORGAN, R., Images of Organization, London, SAGE Publications, 2006.
• RABOCA, H. M. (fără an). Teorie şi comportament organizaţional. Preluat de pe http://www.apubb.ro/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Curs-Teorii-Organizational-Master.pdf
• RAFAELI, A. “What is an Organization? Who are the Members?”, Creating Tomorrow’s Organizations: A Handbook for Future Research in Organizational Behavior, 1996, p. 25.
• ROBBINS, S. P., & Judge, T. A., Organizational Behavior (ed. 15). New Jersey, Pearson Education, Inc., 2013.
• SCHERMERHORN, J. R. et al., Organizational behavior (ed. 7). John Wiley & Sons, 2002.
• STEVEN K. S. et al., „Self-Organization and Social Organization: U.S. and Chinese Constructions”, în T. R. Tyler, R. M. Kramer, & O. P. John, The Psychology of the Social Self (pg. 193-222). Routledge, 1999.
• VLĂSCEANU, M., Psihosociologia organizațiilor și conducerii, București, Paideia, 1993.
• VLĂSCEANU, M., Organizaţiile şi cultura organizării, Iași, Trei, 1999.
• VLĂSCEANU, M., Organizatii si comportament organizational, Iași, Polirom, 2003.
• ZLATE, M., Tratat de psihologie organizational-managerială, Vol. I, Iași, Polirom, 2004
