Francis Kanashiro Meneghetti

Por uma crítica ao conceito de desenvolvimento sustentável

This paper critically assesses the concept of sustainable development. It articulates arguments that challenge the dominant view of the concept by exposing its ideological essence, which falsely represents the possibility of reconciling capitalism and solutions to the ecological crisis. The methodological basis for this reflection draws upon the critical perspective of the Frankfurt School. The paper discusses major contradictions of the concept in the capitalist system, and argues about the impossibility of reconciling an alleged ecologically responsible practice with the logics and aims of such system.

Burocracia como organização, poder e controle

The main objective of this work is to analyze the way in which Mauricio Tragtenberg and Fernando Claudio Prestes Motta conceived bureaucracy. The specific objectives are: to understand the main characteristics of bureaucracy according to Weber, the author who has most influence on the work of Tragtenberg and Prestes Motta, to arrive at an understanding of bureaucracy as expressed in the work of Tragtenberg, to learn how bureaucracy is understood in the work of Prestes Motta and to analyze the relationships that exist between the understanding of bureaucracy in Tragtenberg and Prestes Motta. In analyzing the authors consideration was given to their concept of bureaucracy, their intellectual trajectory, the order of their production, epistemologies, space and historical time, the semantic, ideological and cultural dimension and questions that are important for an understanding of the theoretical development of the concept. The conclusion was reached that, despite the differences in the intellectual paths of Tragtenberg and Prestes Motta, bureaucracy is understood by both as being organization, power and control.

Pragmatismo e os pragmáticos nos estudos organizacionais

The main objective of this theoretical essay is to analyze the main contributions that Pragmatism has offered toOrganizational Studies and, more specifically, evaluate whether the theoretical contributions by such philosophers as Charles Pierce and John Dewey allow us to regard pragmatism as common sense, science, or theoryof knowledge. This paper also examines the contributions - possibilities and limitations - of pragmatism as scientific knowledge in order to understand the path of pragmatism in Organizational Studies. The likely conclusion is that to be pragmatic is not to conceive of studies articulated in the epistemological field of pragmatism. The pragmatic individual sees in the usefulness and in the need for action the tension point that casts a doubt in the veracity of the assumptions of pragmatism as a science. What takes place in Organizational Studies is the conversion of pragmatism as scientific knowledge into irrational subordination to function and practical action, mainly in the fields of economy, politics, science, culture, education, and so on.

Reflexões epistemológicas para a pesquisa em administração: contribuições de Theodor W. Adorno

Adornos philosophical legacy came to be considered in researches in the area of business administration, especially in organizational studies (Batista-dos-Santos, Alloufa, & Nepomuceno, 2010; Faria, 2004; Paes de Paula, 2008, 2012). This paper is intended to contribute with epistemological reflections and their implications in the use of dialectic as a method of analysis. Adornos contributions to research in organization studies materialize in at least 6 ways: (a) the fight against totalitarian philosophical systems; (b) when ideas are elements from Praxis, these have concrete potential in the objective world; (c) the primacy of an object over a subject makes an object qualitatively distinct; (d) an object studied is nothing without a subject who will study it, because without the subject the object does not exist; (e) a subject thinks about reality principally through ideas and concepts; (f) as any reality studied cannot be fully knowable, it can only be known through what it shows, i.e. a non-concept can only be known through a concept, because a relationship of mutual existence allows us to consider the existence of a potential totality.

Bureaucracy as organization, power and control

The main objective of this work is to analyze the way in which Mauricio Tragtenberg and Fernando Claudio Prestes Motta conceived bureaucracy. The specific objectives are: to understand the main characteristics of bureaucracy according to Weber, the author who has most influence on the work of Tragtenberg and Prestes Motta, to arrive at an understanding of bureaucracy as expressed in the work of Tragtenberg, to learn how bureaucracy is understood in the work of Prestes Motta and to analyze the relationships that exist between the understanding of bureaucracy in Tragtenberg and Prestes Motta. In analyzing the authors consideration was given to their concept of bureaucracy, their intellectual trajectory, the order of their production, epistemologies, space and historical time, the semantic, ideological and cultural dimension and questions that are important for an understanding of the theoretical development of the concept. The conclusion was reached that, despite the differences in the intellectual paths of Tragtenberg and Prestes Motta, bureaucracy is understood by both as being organization, power and control.

Burocracia como organización, poder y control

The main objective of this work is to analyze the way in which Mauricio Tragtenberg and Fernando Claudio Prestes Motta conceived bureaucracy. The specific objectives are: to understand the main characteristics of bureaucracy according to Weber, the author who has most influence on the work of Tragtenberg and Prestes Motta, to arrive at an understanding of bureaucracy as expressed in the work of Tragtenberg, to learn how bureaucracy is understood in the work of Prestes Motta and to analyze the relationships that exist between the understanding of bureaucracy in Tragtenberg and Prestes Motta. In analyzing the authors consideration was given to their concept of bureaucracy, their intellectual trajectory, the order of their production, epistemologies, space and historical time, the semantic, ideological and cultural dimension and questions that are important for an understanding of the theoretical development of the concept. The conclusion was reached that, despite the differences in the intellectual paths of Tragtenberg and Prestes Motta, bureaucracy is understood by both as being organization, power and control.