Suchergebnisse

The purpose of the article is to interpret the theory of organization (internal factors of its success) by C. Barnard from the standpoint of modern science. The article consistently formulates the main provisions of the theory of the cooperative organization of Ch. Barnard, each of them is interpreted and evaluated from the standpoint of modern management. Comparative analysis traces the connection of the theory with the works of followers. It is shown that the concept of "morally binding collective goal" is replaced by two concepts — "strategic vision" and "mission", the concept of "internal balance" is replaced by the concept of "motivation", where the motivations from the organization are divided into external and internal factors; and the term "effi ciency", meaning, according to Ch. Barnard, the degree of satisfaction of the needs of employees, is interpreted as the rational use of resources (productivity). "External balance" is interpreted as "external strategic compliance", and the synonym for "external balance" according to C. Barnard ("effi ciency") has acquired a diff erent meaning and has become one of the key concepts in management. Ch. Barnard's concept of power of the leader includes two types of power (offi cial and personal); in modern management, there are 3 types of power: rational-legal, traditional and personal. The concept of Ch. Barnard "zone of indiff erence" today is interpreted as the legitimacy (legality) of power. According to Ch. Barnard, internal balance ensures internal cooperation. By analogy, it is argued that the external balance provides external cooperation. Those. organization: cooperative system at the micro level; component of the cooperative supersystem at the macro level, and for this supersystem, to one degree or another, the provisions of the theory of Ch. Barnard are valid, incl. about common goals and contributions to their achievement (the theory of extended organization — extended enterprise). The theory of the cooperative organization by Ch. Barnard is still relevant today, but without a modern interpretation, its correct understanding is impossible, because. the evolving theory and practice of management have changed the meanings of its variables. The value of the article lies in the modern interpretation of Ch. Barnard's theory.