In this article the authors explore Albert Speer's (Hitler's Minister of Armaments and War) theories of organizational change "with the specific purpose of framing and accentuating the anomaly that organizational change agents such as Albert Speer represent in technological societies. On the one hand, Speer was an exponent of some of the most advanced, participative, and 'humanistic'... management theories being endorsed today. At the same time, however, he utilized these theories and practices to promote the goals of one of the most inhumane societies in the history of mankind.. The crimes of the Third Reich are essentially modern crimes, made possible by 20th century technology, which holds within it both great promise and great danger for human values." The authors discuss the limitations of present forms of organizational change and suggest new directions and perspectives for an emerging theoretical base.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Allison, G. T.Essence of decision. Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1971.
2.
Almond, G. A., & Verba, S.The civic culture. Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1965.
3.
Bennis, W. G.The Doppelganger effect. Newsweek, September 17, 1973, p. 13-13.
4.
Bennis, W. G., & Slater, P. L.The temporary society. New York: Harper and Row, 1964.
5.
Blake, R. R., & Mouton, J. S.The managerial grid. Houston: Gulf Publishing, 1964.
6.
Cartwright, D.The nature of group cohesiveness. Group dynamics. New York: Harper and Row, 1968.
7.
Chin, R., & Benne, K. D.General strategies for effecting changes in human systems. In Warren G. Bennis, Kenneth D. Benne, and Robert Chin (Eds.), The planning of change. New York: Rinehart & Winston, 1969. Pp. 32-59.
8.
Cornuelle, R.De-managing America: The final revolution. New York: Random House, 1975.
9.
Emery, F. E. The historical validity of the industrial democracy project. Unpublished paper presented at the Summer Socio-Technical Systems Study Group, UCLA, 1970.
10.
French, W. L., & Bell, C. H., Jr.Organization development. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1973.
11.
Galbraith, J. K.The affluent society. New York: Signet Books, 1957.
12.
Gibson, F. K., & Teasley, C. E.The humanistic model of organizational motivation: A review of research support. Public Administration Reviezw, January-February 1973, pp. 89-96.
13.
Greiner, L. E.Evolution & revolution as organizations grow. Harvard Business Review, July August 1972, 50, 37-46.
14.
Gross, B.Friendly fascism: A model for America. Social Policy, November-December 1970, 1, 44-52.
15.
Guerreiro-Ramos, A.Models of man and administrative theory. Public Administration Review, May-June 1972, 32, 241-246.
16.
Guerreiro-Ramos, A. Misplacement of concepts and administrative theory; Theory of organizational delimitations: A preliminary statement. Two unpublished papers, School of Public Administration, University of Southern California, n.d.
17.
Harvey, J. B.Organization development as a religious movement. Training and Development Journal, March 1974, 28, 24-27.
18.
Heilbroner, R. L.An inquiry into the human prospect. New York: W. W. Norton, 1974.
19.
Heilbroner, R. L., & London, Paul. (Eds.) Corporate social policy. Reading, Mass.: Addison Wesley, 1975. Pp. ix-xix.
20.
Janis, I. L.Groupthink. Psychology Today, November 1971, 5, 43-76.
21.
Janis, I. L.Victims of group think. Boston: Houghton-Nlifflin, 1972.
22.
Landauer,J.When the boss gets in trouble. Wall Street Journal, July 31, 1975, p. 15-15.
23.
Leavitt, H. J.On the design part of organizational design. Paper presented at the University of Pittsburgh Conference on Organizational Design, October 1974.
24.
Likert, R.The human organization. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967.
25.
Mannheim, K.Man and society in an age of reconstruction. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1940.
26.
Mittler, E. Socio-technical systems as an open system. Unpublished paper presented at the Summer Socio-Technical Systems Study Group, UCLA, 1970.
