Read the passage and answer the question that follows.
The most important problem posed by the existence of different interest, that is to say different mental models and paradigms about and within organizations, is how to tackle their (potential) incompatibility. In order to manage the cognitive and normative differences and preferences as part of organizational practice, knowledge management and thus management education will have to detach themselves from a functionalist management ideology, and the positivistic idea of knowledge and rationality which is associated with it. Such concepts as deuteron learning, n-th order changes, and innovation (instead of improvements) do not fit into the latter approach. Functionalism has a marked preference for unity above diversity, for harmony above conflict, for (functional) integration, and it chooses order above the potential chaos of continuous change.
Incompatibility or incommensurability is then seen as a grave threat to vested interests. Functionalists in particular react too emotionally and with disgust at the idea of (apparent) unreconcilable differences which adhere to incommensurability. If, however, knowledge management and therefore also management education wish to be able to pride themselves on the fact that they aspire to continuous innovation and learning in organizations, then the management of irreconcilability and pluriformity will be an unavoidable and indispensable prerequisite for its success.
Postmodernism belies all grand narratives like those of positivism and even Habermas’s theory of rationality, that try to force people into the mold of a specific way of thinking and acting. Postmodernism explains this tendency of grand theoretical system by positing two central characteristics of human reason : first, there is the fundamental and inalienable freedom or reason to conceptualize ‘the world’ in different ways, while second, each of these conceptualizations has a built-in and irreducible claim to university.
Management of incommensurability and heterogeneity in organizations expressly demands a postmodern epistemological perspective. Such concepts as incommensurability and internal differences have a prominent place in postmodernism. As is evident from the above quotation, postmodernism believes all great narratives on the levels of both epistemology and social philosophy. Positivism and even Habermas’ theory of rationality, which under the guise of universality attempted to force people into a certain way of thinking and acting, as history has so adequately demonstrated, do not shrink from a totalitarian approach.
Postmodernism shows that the incompatibility of grand theoretical system is to be traced to two central features of human reason : first, the fundamental freedom of thought with which to view the world in one’s own and therefore different way, and second, the inbuilt claim to universality, i.e. that one considers one’s own point of view to be the best. It is for this reason that in practice it is not enough to minimalize the differences between alternative perspectives (which could lead to a kind of pluralistic indifference); neither would it do to resolve the conflicts between them in a forcible manner (this would lead only to dogmatism). Managing differences will therefore be a challenge for knowledge management to find which leading element would be helpful in steering the ship of organization past the rocks of totalitarian rule and then around the cliffs of indifference.
A suitable title for the passage could be:
Read the passage and answer the question that follows.
The most important problem posed by the existence of different interest, that is to say different mental models and paradigms about and within organizations, is how to tackle their (potential) incompatibility. In order to manage the cognitive and normative differences and preferences as part of organizational practice, knowledge management and thus management education will have to detach themselves from a functionalist management ideology, and the positivistic idea of knowledge and rationality which is associated with it. Such concepts as deuteron learning, n-th order changes, and innovation (instead of improvements) do not fit into the latter approach. Functionalism has a marked preference for unity above diversity, for harmony above conflict, for (functional) integration, and it chooses order above the potential chaos of continuous change.
Incompatibility or incommensurability is then seen as a grave threat to vested interests. Functionalists in particular react too emotionally and with disgust at the idea of (apparent) unreconcilable differences which adhere to incommensurability. If, however, knowledge management and therefore also management education wish to be able to pride themselves on the fact that they aspire to continuous innovation and learning in organizations, then the management of irreconcilability and pluriformity will be an unavoidable and indispensable prerequisite for its success.
Postmodernism belies all grand narratives like those of positivism and even Habermas’s theory of rationality, that try to force people into the mold of a specific way of thinking and acting. Postmodernism explains this tendency of grand theoretical system by positing two central characteristics of human reason : first, there is the fundamental and inalienable freedom or reason to conceptualize ‘the world’ in different ways, while second, each of these conceptualizations has a built-in and irreducible claim to university.
Management of incommensurability and heterogeneity in organizations expressly demands a postmodern epistemological perspective. Such concepts as incommensurability and internal differences have a prominent place in postmodernism. As is evident from the above quotation, postmodernism believes all great narratives on the levels of both epistemology and social philosophy. Positivism and even Habermas’ theory of rationality, which under the guise of universality attempted to force people into a certain way of thinking and acting, as history has so adequately demonstrated, do not shrink from a totalitarian approach.
Postmodernism shows that the incompatibility of grand theoretical system is to be traced to two central features of human reason : first, the fundamental freedom of thought with which to view the world in one’s own and therefore different way, and second, the inbuilt claim to universality, i.e. that one considers one’s own point of view to be the best. It is for this reason that in practice it is not enough to minimalize the differences between alternative perspectives (which could lead to a kind of pluralistic indifference); neither would it do to resolve the conflicts between them in a forcible manner (this would lead only to dogmatism). Managing differences will therefore be a challenge for knowledge management to find which leading element would be helpful in steering the ship of organization past the rocks of totalitarian rule and then around the cliffs of indifference.
A suitable title for the passage could be:
The correct option is C Management of incompatibility in a post modern
perspective
The main theme of the passage is -
“Management of incompatibility is a very important aspect for knowledge management and management education. Functionalism is not able to help people to manage it. The author suggests that post modernism can help management education to manage incompatibility.”
This is best captured by (c).
The main theme of the passage is not to compare functionalism and post modernism. So (a) is wrong.
(b) is a half-baked answer. It is not talking about post modernism.
(d) is again a half-baked answer.
Management of incompatibility in a post modern perspective
The main theme of the passage is -
“Management of incompatibility is a very important aspect for knowledge management and management education. Functionalism is not able to help people to manage it. The author suggests that post modernism can help management education to manage incompatibility.”
This is best captured by (c).
The main theme of the passage is not to compare functionalism and post modernism. So (a) is wrong.
(b) is a half-baked answer. It is not talking about post modernism.
(d) is again a half-baked answer.
