Keywords
epistemological debate
administrative sciences
theory
organizations.
Semiótica
debate epistemológico
ciencias de la administración
teoría
organizaciones
Semiotics
epistemological debate
administrative sciences
theory
organizations
How to Cite
Abstract
The articIe recreates part of the group Tel Quel's semiotic proposal in the first part, trying to incorporate afterwards, dominant ideological elements in the constitution of stocks of knowledge in the administrative sciences, reinforced by the definition of a behavioral code that norms the process of production of these scientific goods. In doing so, the most challenging epistemological debates of the second half of the twentieth century are revisited and a broad picture of its determination, in the field of administrative sciences is sketched, from the point of view of one of its more significant objects, the modern organizations. Significant concIusions are drawn upon considering the subordinate development of organizational theory and the marginal texts that binds it. This allows for a critical analysis of the theory and the consideration of both, the paradigrns cooperation and participation within the field.
References
Audet, M. 1983. Le preces social de la production scientifique des sociologues au Québec de 1940 a 1965. Tesis de doctorado: Universidad de Montrea!.
Audet, M. YH., Bouchikhi (eds.). 1993. Structuration du social et modernité avancée. Autour des travaux d'Anthony Giddens, Québec, Les Presses de l'Université Lava!.
Audet, M. et al. 1986. "Science et résolution de problérnes: liens, difficultés et voies de dépassement dans le champ des sciences de l'adrninistration". Philosophie des sciences sociales- Philosophy of the Social Sciences. (16): 409-440.
Bames, B. 1972. "On the Reception of Scientific Beliefs". En Bames, B. (ed.), 269-291.
(ed.). 1972. Sociology of Science. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, Ltd.
(1977). lnterest and the Growth of Knowledge. Londres: Routledge and Keagan Paul.
"On the Conventional Character of Knowledge and Cognition". En Knorr- Cetina, K y M. Mulkay (eds.), 19-52.
Bames, B. Y R. Dolby. 1970. "The Scientific Ethos: a Deviant Viewpoint". European Joumal of Sociology. (2): 3-25.
Bames, B. Y D. Edge (eds,). 1982. Science in Contexto Readings in the Sociology of Science. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Boudon, R. 1993. "Le choeur des relativistes. Sur quelques aspects du relativisme contemporain". En Audet, M. y H., Bouchikhi (eds.), 120-141.
Bourdieu, P. 1975. "La spécificité du champ scientifique et les conditions sociales du progrès de la raison". Sociologie et Société. 7 (1): 91-117.
(1971a)."Le marché des biens symboliques". L'année sociologique. (20): 49-126.
(1971b). "Champ du pouvoir, champ intellectuel et habitus de casse". Scolies. 1: 7-26.
Braverrnan, H. 1967. Trabajo y Capital Monopolista. New York: Monthly Review Press.
Burrell, G. Y G. Morgan. 1979. Sociological Paradigms and Organizational Analysis. Exeter Heinemann Educational Books Ltd.
Chiavenato,I. 1998. Introducción a la teoría general de la administración. Bogotá: McGraw- Hill Interamericana S.A.
Cole, 1. Y S. Cole. 1973. Social Stratification in Science. Chicago: The Chicago University Press.
Crane, D. 1972. Invisible Colleges. Diffusion of Knowledge in Scientific Communities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Crozier, M. Y E., Friedberg. 1990. El actor y el sistema. México D.F. Alianza Editorial Mexicana.
De Solla Price, D. 1972. Science et supra science. París: Fayard, col.
Elías, N. et al (eds.). 1982. "Scientific Establishments and Hierarchies". Sociology of the Sciences Yearbook. (6). Dordrecht, Boston, Reide.
Etzioni, A (ed.). 1970. A Sociological Reader on Complex Organizations. Londres: Holt, Reinhart & Wiston.
Feyerabend, P. 1975. Against Method: Outline of an Anarchistic Theory of Knowledge. Londres: New Left Books.
Fisch, R 1977. "Psychology of Science". En Spiegel-Rosing y D. de Solla Priece (eds.), 277-318.
Gilbert, N. 1976. "The Transforrnation of Research Findings into Scientific Knowledge". Social Studies of Science. 6 (3-4): 281-306.
Knorr-Cetina, K. Y M., Mulkay (eds.). 1983. Science Observed. Perspectives on the Social Study of Science. Londres: Sage Publications Ltd.
Kristeva, Julia. 1969. "Ideología del discurso sobre la literatura". En La Nouvelle Critique, 39bis.
Kuhn, T. 1970. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lawrence, P. YJ. Lorsch. 1976. Las organizaciones y el ambiente: diferenciación e integración administrativa. Madrid: Editorial Tecnos.
Merton, R(comp.). 1972. The Sociology of Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
(1972). "The Mathew Effect on Science". En Merton, R (comp.), 251-276.
Mitroff.T, 1973. "The Disinterested Scientist: Fact or Fiction?". Social Education. (37): 761-765.
(1974). "Norms and Counter-Norms in a Select Group of the Apollo Moon Scientists" American Sociological Review. (39): 559-575.
Morgan, G. 1986. Images ofthe Organization. Londres: Sage Publications Ltd.
(ed.). 1983. Beyond Method Strategies for Social Research. Londres: Sage
Publications Ltd.
Mulkay, M. 1976. "Norm and Ideology in Science". Social Science Information-lnformation sur les sciences sociales. 15: 637-656.
(1977). "Sociology of the Scientific Research Cornmunity". En Spiegel-Rosing y D. de Solla Price (eds.), 336-354.
(1980). "The Sociology of Science in East and West". Current Sociology. 28 (3): 43-64.
Science and the Sociology of Knowledge. Londres: George Allen & Unwin.
Pérez Yglesias, María. 1981a. "La semiótica de la productividad y la teoría del texto de Julia Kristeva". Revista de Filología y Lingüística. 7 (1-2): 59-77.
(1981b). "El grupo Tel Quel: una práctica textual revolucionada o la crítica semiótica del futuro". Káñina. 5 (2).
Selznick,A. 1970. "Foundations of the Theory of Organizations". En Etzioni, A (ed.), 14-32.
Simon,H. 1982. El comportamiento administrativo. Estudio de los procesos decisorios en la organización administrativa. Buenos Aires: Aguilar S.A.
Sokal,Ay Bricmont, J. 1999.lmposturas Intelectuales. Madrid: Ediciones Paidós Ibérica S.A.
Spiegel-Rosing y D. de Solla Price (eds.). 1977. Science. Technology and Society. A Cross-Disciplinary Perspective. Londres: Sage Publications Ltd.
Storer,N. 1966. The Social System of Science. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Whitley,R. 1983. "From the Sociology of Scientific Cornmunities to the Study of Scientists' Negotiations and Beyond". Social Science lnformation-Information sur les sciences socials. 24 (4-5): 681-720.
(1982). "The Establishment and Structure of the Sciences as Reputational
Organizations". En Elías, N. et al. (eds.), 313-357.
(1984a). "The Development of Management Studies as a Fragmented Adhocracy". Social Science Information-Inforrnation sur les sciences socials. 23 (4-5): 775-818.
(1984b). "The Fragmented State of Management Studies: Reasons and Consequences". Joumal of Management Studies. 21 (3): 331-348.
(1984c). "The Scientific Status of Management Research as a Practically Oriented Social Science". Joumal of Management Studies. 21 (4): 369-390.
Ziman, J. 1968. Public Knowledge. Boston: Cambridge University Press.
Zuckerman, H. 1972. Scientific Elite: Nobel Laureates in the United States. New York: Free Press.
(1970). "Stratification in American Science".