Administration theories are proposals made after studying the factors that directly and indirectly affect the performance of organizations and the individuals that compose them, there have been different approaches over the years and there is no definitive one.

Below is a synopsis of the most outstanding aspects of each of the following administration theories, also called schools of administrative thought: scientific administration, classical administration theory, bureaucracy, human relations theory, and behavior theory. organization, total quality theory, Z theory, systems theory, contingency theory, and organizational development theory.


The action of managing arises with a man from its origins since to survive he needed the cooperation of others. From those moments the premise was clear, managing tasks served to solve problems in a much simpler way and started from the needs of the human being, taking into account the achievement of a specific objective that could benefit everyone.

To the question of what is administration, the dictionary of the Spanish language answers: administration is the group of organisms dedicated to the management and operation of a certain area of ​​social life.

Idalberto Chiavenato, the author of Introduction to the General Theory of Administration, says: “The word administration comes from the Latin ad (towards, direction, trend) and minister (subordination or obedience, and means one who performs a function under the command of another , that is, one who renders a service to another”.

See also  Sales Guide: Types, Sales Cycle, Techniques, and Everything to Sell More

The administration as a process is composed of different phases, in the first one is its mechanical component integrated by three stages: the first one is the forecast in which it is determined what it is that it is desired to achieve, later in the planning it is chosen the necessary course to achieve that desire or goal and finally the organization gives a body to the two previous parts, structuring them in specific techniques, showing responsibilities and obligations of each of its members.

As a second component, there is the dynamic phase of the administration, in which three additional stages are differentiated, in the first place there is the integration, which has to do with choosing the most suitable collaborators to carry out a certain task, those who give the impulse necessary to achieve the goals set, later, the direction, allows to coordinate the activities and monitor if they are carried out properly and, finally, the control is the quantifiable part, where the results obtained are measured to know if that has been achieved that was planned

Administration as a science that studies organizations has evolved in search of the best way to manage an organization and its resources, which has promoted the growth of institutions, individuals, and society in general. Through this search, different approaches have been developed, always under the premise of obtaining the best possible performance.

management theories

In the theories of administration, different approaches have been presented by various scholars through a specific philosophy, some of them still stand to this day with some modifications. Here is a summary of each one:

Scientific Administration

At this point, technological development also allowed the administration to develop, since with the advances it was necessary to establish order. Who is known as the father of the scientific management school Frederick Taylor?

Before Taylor’s proposals, the workers had the responsibility of planning and executing their work. They were entrusted with the production and given the freedom to carry out their tasks in the way they believed was correct. The author describes it this way: “Foremen and shop managers know better than anyone that their knowledge and skill is far below the combined knowledge and skill of all the men under their command. Consequently, even the most experienced managers leave the problem of selecting the best and most economical way to do the job for their workers.

Hence, its principles “seen in its historical perspective, represented a great advance and a new approach, a tremendous innovation compared to the system.” It must be recognized here that Taylor represents the dream of a time, the United States of the early years of the 20th century, where it was imperative to achieve the highest possible efficiency coupled with an accelerated population explosion in the cities and a growing demand for products.

For Taylor, management acquired new powers and responsibilities described by the following four principles :

  • Planning principle: substitute at work the individual criteria of the operator, improvisation, and empirical-practical performance by methods based on scientific procedures. Replace improvisation with science, through method planning.
  • Principle of preparation: scientifically select workers according to their skills and prepare them, train them to produce more and better, according to the planned method.
  • Control principle: control the work to certify that it is being carried out by the established standards and according to the planned plan.
  • Principle of execution: distinctly distribute the powers and responsibilities, so that the execution of the work is disciplined. (Bento, 2007)

At this time there were different criticisms of the approach that had been given since the human part had been relegated to the background and focused on the tasks to be carried out. There was also a lack of knowledge about certain administrative issues, it is important to mention that there was no industrial experience like the current one, all these factors made this theory be viewed rigidly, since it focused mainly on machines, tasks, and the way of executing them efficiently, always seeking to manage time in the best way, a specialization was also necessary for the workers to perform tasks in an exhausting way, allowing a fragmentation in which each one was supposed to be a specialist in a certain area.

Classical Theory of Administration

Fayol’s theory is remembered for its systemic and comprehensive approach in which different points of the companies are covered, since for Fayol it was extremely important to sell at the same time as to produce, and the financing method was also important to ensure the company’s assets. It can be said that the organization was understood more comprehensively since the system was dependent on those who integrated it.

A difference to highlight between Taylor’s theory and Henry Fayol’s is the use of time, since Fayol focuses more on the general structure of the organization, while Taylor focused more on the method and tools of work for better efficiency.

For Fayol, the human factor was to be taken into consideration, since the worker, as well as the manager, were important beings and it was necessary to consider them to create synergy, a unit, something like the same team spirit.

The classical theory of administration was the product of the need to create a scientific doctrine of administration to structure knowledge, a solid science to be taught later at all levels of education. Bosses were needed in the companies, but bosses who assimilated the responsibilities of a group of workers, bosses who knew how to direct as well as plan their activities, bosses with the great support of knowledge both in their area and in administrative practice, and who At the same time, they will have judgments and behaviors worthy of authority.

The classical theory focused on defining the structure to guarantee the efficiency of all parties involved, be they bodies (sections, departments) or people (position holders and task performers). The administrative task should not be a burden for the authorities, but rather a responsibility shared with the subordinates.

Fayol created favorable scenarios for administrative efficiency and, therefore, for the generation of profits for the company. These scenarios were supported by an instrument of investigation and application of administrative practice called the administrative process (foresee, organize, direct, coordinate, and control). That is, a structure of administrative principles(14 in general), a study of the functions of a company, the ideal profile of a manager and its relationship with the function he performs, and a complete philosophy of administrative practice as a science and as an academic subject in educational institutions. This was what the French pioneer of management inherited from us, who, together with Taylor’s scientific theory of management, formed a solid knowledge of management for many decades.

Henry fayol’s 14 general principles of management are:

  1. Division of work: Specialization of tasks and people to increase efficiency.
  2. Authority and responsibility:
    1. Authority: Right to give orders and expect obedience.
    2. Responsibility: Duty to render accounts
  3. Discipline:
    1. Bosses: Energy and justice in orders, sanctions, and clear and fair rules.
    2. Subordinates: obedience and respect for rules.
  4. Unity of command: Each employee should receive orders from a single boss.
  5. Unity of direction: There must be a boss and a plan for each group of activities that have the same objective.
  6. Subordination of individual interests to generals: General interests must be above individual interests.
  7. Staff remuneration: There must be fair and guaranteed satisfaction for employees and for the organization.
  8. Centralization: Concentration of authority at the top of the organization
  9. Escalator Chain: A line of authority that runs from the highest to the lowest rung. It can be skipped if it is essential and there is authorization.
  10. Order: A place for everything and everything in its place. Material and human order.
  11. Equity: Kindness and justice to get staff loyalty.
  12. Staff stability: There must be a reasonable permanence of a person in their position.
  13. Initiative: Ability to visualize a plan and ensure its success.
  14. Team spirit: Harmony and the union of people are vital for the organization. (Chiavenato, 2000)

Bureaucracy Theory

This theory is developed based on the contradictions between the classical theory of administration and human relations since both were handled as opposite poles. It became necessary to understand the organization as a much broader and more complex entity, which takes into account both the structure and the participants or, as we currently call them, collaborators.

Not only does it start from this point, but the companies, being bigger and bigger, demanded new models that will adjust to the times that elapsed since their needs were different.

Bureaucracy is a form of human organization that is based on rationality, on the adequacy of the means to the intended objectives, to guarantee maximum efficiency in the pursuit of those objectives.

Weber points out that the modern system of production, rational and capitalist, originated from a new set of moral norms, which he called the “Protestant ethic”: hard work as a gift from God, thrift, and asceticism that provide the reinvestment of surplus income, instead of spending and consuming it on material symbols. He verified that capitalism, bureaucracy, and modern science constitute 3 forms of rationality that emerged from those religious changes. The similarities between Protestant and capitalist behavior are striking. Weber distinguishes 3 types of society:

  • In traditional society, patriarchal and hereditary characteristics predominate.
  • In a charismatic society, mystical, arbitrary, and personalistic characteristics predominate.
  • In a legal, rational, or bureaucratic society, impersonal norms and rationality in the choice of means and ends predominate.

Weber describes 3 types of legitimate authority:

traditional authority

When subordinates consider that the orders of superiors are justified because that was always the way things were done. The patriarchal dominance of the head of the family represents the purest type of traditional authority. Traditional power is not rational, it can be transmitted by inheritance and it is conservative. All social change implies a break from traditions.

In traditional domination, the legitimization of power comes from the belief in the eternal past, in justice, and in the relevance of the traditional way of acting. The traditional leader is the lord who commands, by the status of heir or successor to him. Although his orders are personal and arbitrary, his limits are set by customs and habits, and his subjects obey out of respect for his traditional status.

When traditional domination spreads, it can assume 2 forms of administrative apparatus to guarantee its survival:

  • Patrimonial form: the officials who preserve the traditional domination are the servants of the “lord” and are economically dependent on him.
  • Feudal form: the administrative apparatus presents a greater degree of autonomy about the “lord”, since the officials are his allies, taking an oath of fidelity. The vassals exercise independent jurisdiction, have their administrative domains, and do not depend on the “lord” for remuneration and subsistence.

charismatic authority

Subordinates accept the orders of the superior as justified, because of the influence of the personality and leadership of the superior with whom they identify. Charisma: extraordinary and indefinable quality in a person. Charismatic power is power without a rational basis, it is unstable and acquires revolutionary characteristics. It cannot be delegated, nor received as an inheritance.

The leader is imposed by being someone out of the ordinary, who possesses magical abilities or displays of heroism or persuasive mental power, and not because of his position or hierarchy. It is an authority based on affective and personal devotion and on the emotional outburst of followers towards the person who possesses the mentioned charisma.

The legitimization of charismatic authority comes from the charismatic personal characteristics of the leader and the devotion and rapture that he manages to impose on his followers.

When charismatic domination includes several followers, the administrative apparatus is made up of the most loyal and devoted disciples and subordinates, to play the role of intermediaries between the charismatic leader and the mass. That administrative apparatus is fickle and unstable. The administrative staff is chosen and selected according to the trust that the leader places in the subordinates. The selection is based on the devotion, authenticity, and trustworthiness of the subordinate. If the subordinate ceases to deserve the trust of the leader, he is replaced by another more trustworthy one.

When the subordinates accept the orders of the superiors as justified because they agree with a set of precepts or norms that they consider legitimate and from which the power of command is derived. It is the type of technical, meritocratic, and administrative authority. It is based on enactment. The basic idea resides in the fact that laws can be promulgated and regulated freely by formal and correct procedures. The ruling group is elected and exercises authority over its subordinates, following certain rules and laws. Obedience is due to a previously established set of legal norms and regulations.

The legitimacy of rational and legal power is based on rationally defined legal norms.

In legal domination, the belief in the justice of the law is the foundation of legitimacy. The people obey the laws because they believe that they are decreed by a chosen procedure, by the rulers and the ruled. The ruler is seen as a person who reached such a position, by legal procedures, and by the position reached, he exercises power within the limits set by legally sanctioned rules and regulations.

The administrative apparatus that corresponds to legal domination is the bureaucracy, and its foundation is the laws and legal order. The position of officials and their relations with the ruler, the governed, and their colleagues are defined by impersonal and written rules, which outline the hierarchy of the administrative apparatus, the rights, and duties inherent to the position, etc. The bureaucracy is the typical organization of modern democratic society and big business. The legal authority covers the modern structure of the State and non-state organizations. Through the “contract,” the hierarchical relationships in it come to constitute schemes of legal authority. (Klinger, 2012)

Theory of human relations

This theory was born to develop a new business philosophy in which an Industrial civilization is shown in which technology and work methods are the most important thing for a manager or administrator, wanting to give importance once again to the human factor since there was a great need to emphasize labor harmony for the employer with his work environment and his employer since there was great exploitation by the latter to achieve the best profit margins and increase efficiency.

The theory of human relations was born in the United States, around the fourth decade of the 20th century, and was possible thanks to the development of the social sciences, especially psychology. It was a movement of reaction and opposition to the classical theory of administration.

Among the people who contributed to the birth of the theory of human relations, we can mention Elton Mayo, as a major reference, who conducted the famous Hawthorne Experiment, as well as Mary Parker Follet and Kurt Lewin.

The theory of human relations was primarily concerned with studying the oppression of man at the hands of the enslaving development of industrialized civilization. Elton Mayo, one of the pioneers of the human relations movement, devoted his books to examining the human, social, and political problems arising from a civilization based almost exclusively on industrialization and technology.

Its deeper causes are defined by Mayo in this way:

  • Work is a typically social activity. The level of production is more influenced by group norms than by wage incentives. The attitude of the employee towards his work and the nature of the group in which he participates are decisive factors of productivity.
  • The worker does not act as an isolated individual but as a member of a social group.
  • The basic task of the administration is to train an elite capable of understanding and communicating, endowed with democratic, persuasive bosses, and appreciated by all the staff.
  • The human person is essentially motivated by the need to “be together”, to “be recognized”, and to receive adequate communication. Mayo disagrees with Taylor’s assertion that the basic motivation of the worker is solely salary.
  • Industrialized civilization causes the disintegration of the primary groups of society, such as the family, informal groups, and religion, while the factory will emerge as a new social unit that will provide a new home, a place for understanding, and emotional security. of individuals.

Hawthorne’s experiment

In 1927 the National Research Council began its experiment at the Western Electric Company factory, located in the Hawthorne neighborhood of Chicago; to determine the relationship between the intensity of lighting and the efficiency of workers in production.

First phase

During the first phase of the experiment, two groups of workers were chosen to carry out the same operation, under identical conditions: an observation group worked under variable light intensity, while the other control group worked under constant light intensity.

Second stage

The second phase began in April 1927. To constitute the observation group (or experimental group), six middle-level young people were selected, neither novice nor expert: five young people assembled the relays, while the sixth supplied the necessary parts to maintain continuous work. The investigation carried out with the experimental group was divided into twelve periods to observe which were the most satisfactory performance conditions.

It consists of transferring six employees, of the forty thousand who worked in the company, to a special location, they are granted special concessions such as breaks, snacks, and shorter work hours. This increases productivity and when the experiment was 8 months old, Elton Mayo, who was at Harvard University studying industrial psychology, was asked to collaborate in the experiment.

Elton Mayo upon arrival removes all concessions granted and to the surprise of psychologists and sociologists, productivity remains constant despite having removed the concessions; When asking the workers the reason for this reaction, they answered “that they increased productivity not because of the concessions granted but because of the commitment they had to have been chosen from 40,000 employees to carry out the study”, consequently the conclusion was drawn that he had psychologically persuaded them.

Third phase

Soon after, the researchers, concerned about the difference in attitudes between the young women in the experimental group and those in the control group, gradually moved away from their initial interest in seeking better physical working conditions and devoted themselves definitively to studying human relations at work.

It consisted of interviewing 22,000 of the 40,000 employees through the application of questionnaires that included all kinds of questions. The results obtained in this experiment were:

  • The employee feels great resentment towards the company where he works
  • The state of mind of the workers influences the productivity of the company.
  • During interviews, the employee has emotional discharges.
  • The fourth phase (Terminal assembly observation room)

An experimental group of nine operators, nine welders, and two inspectors was chosen, all from the terminal assembly section for telephone stations, who went to work in a special room whose working conditions were identical to those of the department.

It was intended to demonstrate the incentive-productivity relationship, the results were:

  1. The incentive-productivity relationship is not great when it comes to the economic aspect
  2. The company has informal work groups that are often more powerful than the formal ones
  3. The company does not accept people who deviate from the guidelines.

The Hawthorne experiment was suspended in 1932 for external reasons, but the influence of its result on administrative theory was fundamental in questioning the basic principles of the then-dominant classical theory. (Aguirre Ramirez, 2013)

Organizational Behavior Theory

Scholars of organizational behavior argued that the concept of “self-actualizing man” explained man’s motivation more accurately, considering that administrations must adapt to the needs of individuals since the human element is the determining factor. in the objectives of the company; for this reason, it is also known as the Theory of Needs and Motivations or as the humanist movement within Industrial Psychology. One of the most representative figures of this approach is the American Abraham Maslow. (1908 -1970), who considered that needs are a psychological, instinctive, social, and cultural product. He pointed out that human needs are structured in a hierarchy, where the upper part of this includes needs for ego and self-actualization and the lower needs have to do with survival, for which they have to be satisfied before the lower level ones are examined. superior.

The order of these needs in the hierarchy would indicate to the managers the actions to follow, satisfying the needs in ascending order, from the purely physiological to those of security, belonging, esteem, (both self-esteem and social prestige), and self-actualization needs. They are at the top of the motivational pyramid. For this reason, organizational managers must ensure that salary needs are relatively satisfied before attempting to resolve needs that follow them in the hierarchy.

Another of the most important exponents of this approach is Douglas McGregor (1906 -1964), who identified in his theory two groups of basic assumptions which he called Theory X and Theory Y.

Theory X posits that people view work as a necessity, but dislike it, avoiding it whenever possible. For this reason, he views people as lazy, lacking in ambition, selfish, disliking responsibility, indifferent to the needs of the organization, resistant to change, and in need of guidance.

Theory Y is more optimistic and states that people have the potential to develop, assume responsibilities, and pursue the goals of the organization if they are given the opportunity and the social environment to do so. He considers work as natural and that people want to work and in the right circumstances obtain great satisfaction. It also states that they can accept, seek responsibilities, and apply imagination, ingenuity, and creativity. He argues that participative administration is the best way to take advantage of human potential by providing a perspective of personal improvement.

Current Approaches in Management Theories

Total Quality Theory

The antecedents of the Total Quality Approach date back to the year 1894, when the first steps were taken in the foundation of Continuous Improvement, but it was during World War II that it was used for the first time by the United States to inspect the quality in the manufacture of weapons, installing control measures at the end of each process that allowed the disposal of products that did not meet the minimum requirements to ensure their proper functioning.

At the end of the War, this philosophy was ignored by the United States and it was not until the 1980s that it began to develop again in the West. Meanwhile, it arrived in Japan at the end of the ’40s through the figure of E. Deming, being the administrative tool used by the occupation forces to accelerate the reconstruction of the country, reaching levels of productivity, efficiency, and effectiveness never seen before.

The difference between the application of this approach in the United States and Japan is that the Americans install the controls in the last phases of the production process, while the Japanese correct their defects in the early stages of the process, which constitutes the so-called ” Kaizen ” Japanese. This philosophy states that quality has a cascading effect, that is, the sooner a defect is detected, the easier it is to correct and the less loss it implies; emphasizing planning and prevention rather than control.

Edwards Deming, one of the main representatives of this approach, was called “the prophet of quality” when he pointed out that managing is predicting. His model is mainly statistical, based on the elimination of errors and controlling the variation of the process using “control charts”.

Another of the Americans responsible for introducing the quality-oriented approach in Japan was Joseph Juran, whose philosophy advocates, unlike Deming, that quality is achieved more by people than by techniques. For Juran, quality is fitness for use, from the customer’s point of view.

Another representative is Philip Crosby. For him, quality is “meeting the requirements”. The important thing is to clearly define the requirements so that mistakes are not made.

Kaoru Ishikawa is known as the foremost “Japanese quality guru”. His main contribution is the use of information collection and analysis tools as a means to solve problems.

On the other hand, it was Armand Feigenbaum who first added the term “total” to the quality approach, which implies a commitment to all areas and people of the organization, as well as to the environment that surrounds it. This author promulgates that the quality of products and services is influenced by nine basic areas known as the 9 M’s: markets (market), money (cost of the program), management (administration), men (highly qualified personnel), motivation (motivation of workers), materials (quality materials), machines and mechanizations (high-quality machines), modern information methods (take advantage of technological advances) and mounting product requirements (add small details).

Total Quality Management is the management of every one of the parts of the production process of a product or service, in addition, it is the proactive administration of all resources, covering everything susceptible to include in customer satisfaction.

The multiple definitions of quality can be grouped into two basic aspects: quality from the customer’s point of view (intersection between what the customer expects from the service and what the company is giving them) and from the organization’s point of view. (meet and if possible exceed, the desires, needs, and expectations of customers).

The fundamental premise for managing Total Quality is the understanding of this philosophy by all the company’s staff, thus satisfying their belonging needs and motivating them to commit to the goal of achieving customer satisfaction. Quality awareness and top management commitment are the first steps to implementing it.

The intangible basis for achieving quality objectives, without which no plan can be successful, is the so-called cornerstone of quality, which includes the commitment of workers, the ability to perform their roles, and interpersonal communication. Commitment is a decisive choice, personal or organizational, to follow an agreed plan of action. Capacity is knowing how. Communication is a common understanding between individuals and groups. Commitment, ability, and communication must be recognized and rewarded by management.

The Total Quality approach consists of two fundamental components: a philosophy and statistical tools for problem-solving. The philosophy includes the following aspects:

  • Quality improvement, by eliminating the causes of problems in the system, inevitably leads to improved productivity.
  • The person in charge of a job is the one who has the most knowledge about it.
  • Everyone wants to be involved and to do their job well.
  • Every person wants to feel like an important contributor.
  • To improve a system, it is better to work as a team than to work individually.
  • A structured process for solving problems with the help of graphical techniques leads to better solutions than an unstructured one.
  • Graphical problem-solving techniques allow one to locate oneself, know where there are variations, the relative importance of the problems to be solved, and whether the changes made have had the desired impact.
  • The adversarial relationship between workers and management is counterproductive and outdated. It is necessary to achieve a climate of mutual trust that guarantees the free flow of ideas.
  • Every organization has hidden “human treasures” waiting to be discovered and developed.

On the other hand, there are a large number of graphic and statistical tools useful for the Total Quality approach, the best known being the diagrams (Venn, Flow, control, dispersion, and cause-effect), the inspection sheet, charts (Pareto, pie, bar), stratification, force field analysis, and histograms, among others.

Theory Z

The “ Theory Z ”, also called the “Japanese method”, is a management theory developed by William Ouchi and Richard Pascale (contributor), who, like McGregor contrasting his Theory Y to a Theory X, contrasted it with a “Theory A”. ”.

Ouchi considers that there are three types of companies, type A assimilated American companies, type J assimilated Japanese firms, and type Z which has a new culture, culture Z. This new culture Z is full of characteristics rarely applied in Western companies at the time and rather includes certain characteristics common to those of Japanese companies.

The Z theory is participatory and is based on human relations, it tries to understand the worker as an integral being who cannot separate his work life from his personal life, and for this reason, it invokes certain special conditions such as trust, teamwork, employment for life, close personal relationships and collective decision-making, all of them applied to obtain a greater performance of the human resource and thus achieve greater business productivity, it is about creating a new humanistic business philosophy in which the company finds yourself committed to your people.

But why is this aura of understanding so filial between the company and its employees? Because Ouchi firmly believes that a job is more than that, it is the structural part of employees’ lives, it is what allows them to live where they live, eat what they eat, wear what they wear, and defines their old age…, so, if this job is fully developed within an organization (as occurs in theory Z), the person integrates into it and creates a sense of belonging.

Theory of Organizations as Social Systems

The General Systems Theory, introduced by Ludwig von Bertalanffy between 1950 and 1956, is one of the approaches that has had the greatest impact on administrative theory. The goal of this theory is to try to avoid the scientific superficiality that has stagnated the sciences.

The first comprehensive exposition of organizations as open systems was presented in 1966 by Daniel Katz and Robert Kahn in their work “Social Psychology of Organizations.” These authors conceive organizations as open, sensitive systems, with the capacity to grow and self-reproduce and with response capacity, in constant exchange with the environment that surrounds them. These systems are composed, in turn, of interrelated parts called subsystems, whose specific activities (of any of the organizational subsystems) affect the rest of the components of the total system. Similarly, the organization is also a subsystem that exists in an environment where there are other dynamically interdependent systems.

Organizations are open systems since they maintain an active interaction with their environment and exist through the exchange of matter, energy, and information with the environment and their transformation within their limits, which will separate the organization from the environment. The interaction of the organization with the environment will be defined by these limits, for which they will interact variably. In today’s organizations, limits are becoming more flexible.

Contingency Theory 

The contingency theory emphasizes that there is nothing absolute in organizations or administrative theory since everything depends on the contingent approach since there is a functional relationship between the environmental conditions and the appropriate administrative techniques for the effective scope of the objectives. organization goals.

The fact that an organization prepares its contingency plans does not mean that it recognizes the inefficiency of its company, but rather that it represents progress when it comes to overcoming any eventuality that can lead to great losses, such as at this time.

It is better to plan when it is not yet necessary, those responsible for planning must constantly evaluate the plans created and must think about other situations that could occur, a contingency plan must not remain static otherwise it would be obsolete, it must be a living document, updating, correcting and improving, all contingency planning must establish strategic objectives as well as an action plan to achieve them.- planning and contingency involves working with hypotheses and developing what the plan will be based on, knowing the point of starting point and will be based on the evolution of needs and resources, this must be exhaustive but without going into too much detail. (Mejia, 2009)

Organizational Development Theory

Organizational Development emerged in the United States in 1962, from the work of a group of scientists who emphasized the planned development of organizations and developed a complex set of ideas about the individual-organization-environment relationship. The organizations of today’s society are framed by a macrosystem in constant change and transformation, which causes the need to design flexible and adaptable organizations for them, building new organizational structures and modifying the organizational culture, for which a new social consciousness of human beings.

The DO is going to be a planned process of organizational change, oriented to the culture, structures, and processes of the organization, with the objective that it acquires the capacity for self-renewal, that it learns the most effective way to solve its problems, and survive the accelerated changes of today’s society; jointly demanding structural changes in the formal organization (in the organizational chart, in the methods, routines and work procedures, etc.), in the organizational processes (decision-making, leadership, delegation, etc.) and the culture and the organizational climate.

OD is a managerial strategy that requires the involvement and leadership of senior management and is fundamentally focused on the human and social aspects of the organization, on the organizational culture and climate; and in doing so, it also intervenes in its processes and structures. Its goals are aimed at achieving greater efficiency, effectiveness, competitiveness, and organizational productivity; as well as the integral development of individuals in organizations.

The OD concept is oriented to organizational change and closely linked to the organizational learning and adaptive capacity of the organization subject to change. But that change must be planned and controlled in a systematic and orderly manner. We can see the OD from two different perspectives: on the one hand, as a complex administrative philosophy, a way of thinking, interpreting, and acting within the context of the organization; and on the other, as a complex educational strategy aimed at educating the members of the organization to identify their problems and seek the most appropriate solutions, promoting communication and commitment at all levels and establishing a collaborative relationship between all members of the organization,


  • Aguirre Ramírez, I. (September 2, 2013). Gestiópolis. Retrieved from
  • Bento, L. (2007). Faculty notes. Retrieved from
  • Chiavenato, I. (2000). Introduction to the general theory of administration. In I. Chiavenato, Introduction to the general theory of administration, third edition. Mexico City: McGraw-Hill | INTER-AMERICAN.
  • Chiavenato, I. (2007). Human resources management. In I. Chiavenato, Human Resources Administration. The human capital of organizations (p. 17). Mexico: McGraw-Hill.
  • Spanish, RA (2014). Dictionary of the Spanish language. Retrieved from
  • Klinger, C. (October 30, 2012). Undertake my strategy. Retrieved from
  • Mejía, R. (July 10, 2009). metropolis. Retrieved from
  • Ouchi, W. (1981). How American Business Can Meet the Japanese Challenge. In W. Ouchi. Perseus.
  • Chiavenato, Idalberto (2001). Administration, administrative process. (3rd ed.) Mexico: McGraw – Hill Interamericana de México.
  • Koontz, Harold (1994). Management a global perspective. (10th ed.) Mexico. McGraw-Hill Interamericana of Mexico.
  • Paulson Edward, Layton (1997): Start Your Own Business (1st Ed.) Mexico. Prentice Hall Publisher.
  • Rodríguez Valencia Joaquín (2002): Administration of Small and Medium Enterprises (5th Ed.) Mexico. Editorial Thompson Publishers.
  • Vasquez Rojas Claudia. (2012, October 16). Evolution of administration and administrative theories. Retrieved from