Social management and deliberative citizenship: convergence of research themes

In the work Tem Razão a Administração? (TENÓRIO, 2016, p. 160), Fernando Tenório, shows the influence of the most prominent scholars of the Frankfurt School (Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno, Herbert Marcuse - critics of the instrumental rationality - and Jürgen Habermas - with his focus on communicative rationality), in his definition of social management. For Tenório, “the adjective ‘social’ qualifying the noun ‘management,’ is understood as the privileged space of social relationship in which everyone has the right to speak, without any coercion” (TENÓRIO, 2016, p. 162). The author discusses the term ‘deliberative citizenship,’ present in the concept of social management, establishing that “{...} legitimacy of decisions must originate in processes of discussion guided by the principles of inclusion, pluralism, participatory equality, autonomy and common good” (p.162).

This issue of Cadernos EBAPE.BR gathers a fantastic collection of articles on these themes, offering interfaces between Philosophy, Sociology, History, and Theory of Organizations.

The first article, “The Potential of “Frankfurtianess” of Habermas in Organizational Studies,” by Luis Gustavo Alves de Lara and Fábio Vizeu, emphasizes the analysis of Habermas’ intellectual production as being politically engaged in contemporary social problems, and considers Habermas as a critical author.

The second article, “Communication that constitutes and transforms subjects: communicative action in Jürgen Habermas, dialogical action in Paulo Freire and Organizational Studies”, by Luis Fernando Silva Andrade, Valderí de Castro Alcântara and José Roberto Pereira, shows that both Habermas and Freire offer elements to deconstruct the dominant instrumental logic and provide bases in their theories for the reconstruction of new and viable possibilities in the forms of organization and management.

Therefore, it is possible to say that the two first articles presented in this issue are connected to the notion of deliberative citizenship portrayed by Tenório, even though the articles do not mention the concept.

As for article 3, “Students’ identities in rural areas: a study based on Bourdieu’s and Althusser’s concepts”, by Eline Gomes de Oliveira Zioli and Elisa Yoshie Ichikawa, the authors explore how education transforms identities, focusing on urban and rural dimensions, from the analysis of the type of education observed at the school Odélia Rossi Arnaldi in Paranavaí, PR. The article highlights the processes of social inclusion based on education.

Article 4, “Reason and Administration: revisiting some fundamental elements,” by Laís Silveira Santos, Maurício C. Serafim, Daniel Moraes Pinheiro, and Maria Clara Figueiredo Dalla Costa Ames, brings a theoretical essay on Philosophy and Reason, analyzing the dimensions of the instrumental and substantive reason.

Article 5, “Business models in the public domain: the public governance canvas,” by Humberto Falcão Martins, João Paulo Mota and Caio Marini, presents and analyzes this specific canvas, considering the relationship among stakeholders and the use of the model as a tool to improve public governance.

Article 6, “Managing innovation based on studies on science, technology, and society: toward a constructivist and critical perspective of innovation management”, by Juan Felipe Espinosa-Cristia, critically analyzes worldviews and the types of epistemology underlying the current innovation theories, revealing dimensions behind the current dominant discourses in administration about innovation and radical innovation.

Article 7, “Communicative and strategic planning-action approach: social technology for the planning of postgraduate programs,” by Luciano Santos Magalhães and Mariluce Paes de Souza, Critically analyzes the communicative and strategic planning -action approach and shows how this social technology supports the process of planning academic programs, emphasizing the dialogue among participants.

Article 8, “Characteristics of scientific collaboration among research groups in areas of exact sciences, biology and humanities,” by Catarina Cecília Odelius and Rafael Nishino Ono, presents extensive research on which factors favor scientific collaboration between researchers of different areas in Brazil. The authors explore the positive consequences of this type of collaboration both for researchers and universities.

Article 9, “Trust in Relational Contracts: a theoretical study,” by Marco Túlio Fundão Zanini and Carmen Pires Migueles, discusses in depth the concept of trust from various theoretical perspectives.

Article 10, “The use of active learning methods in MBA marketing,” by Alexandre Borba Salvador and Ana Akemi Ikeda, conducts a critical analysis of the PBL (Problem Based Learning) method in a marketing course taught in an MBA. The article reflects on the improvement of teaching methodologies to further develop the analytical capacity of MBA students.

Article 11, “American missionaries in Bahia: the undergraduate program in administration at the UFBA Administration School”, by Carlos Osmar Bertero, Amon Barros and Rafael Alcadipani, presents a historiography on how the United States, with the assistance of the FGV EAESP (which was the disseminator of the US model in Brazil), supported the UFBA School of Administration. The article analyzes the difficulties and the successes of the professionals involved in the scientific support to UFBA during the process of creating the undergraduate program in administration.

Article 12, “Identification and analysis of enterprise risks associated with the value environment of the Cargill cocoa business,” by Marcelo Albuquerque, Marcelo Henrique Gomes Couto, and Fábio Lotti Oliva, identifies and analyzes the corporate risks associated with the value environment of Cargill’s cocoa business, adopting a qualitative method and case study.

Article 13, “Dimensions of innovation in justice organizations: proposition of a theoretical methodological framework,” by Marilu Pereira Castro and Tomás Aquino Guimarães, proposes a theoretical-methodological model that points out the dimensions influencing the process of innovation in justice organizations. The article deals with social inclusion as it emphasizes the importance of equality in access to justice, overcoming the slowness and difficulties that hinder effective access to justice for all citizens.

Article 14, “Pop-Management: 15 Years Later - the incorporation of pop-management in the work of executives of big companies”, by Maria Paula Ferraz Calfat Duarte and Cíntia Rodrigues de Oliveira Medeiros, presents a “critique of the critique,” or the response to the criticisms made to POP-Management. The study shows that, in the executives’ point of view, POP-Management has advantages that they value when searching for literature to understand the new paradigms and ideas in business administration. For the academia, research that demonstrates the reasons why the general public consumes this kind of literature is significant, despite the limitations observed. The study portrayed in the article is relevant to stimulate the discussion on the difficulties of scientific research to reach a broader audience.

Finally, article 15, “Political awareness and participation of representatives of civil society in the Municipal Council of Social Assistance of Vitória - ES - Brazil”, by Arthur Gomes Dau, Márcia Prezotti Palassi and Marta Zorzal e Silva, deals with social inclusion and touches, even though not directly citing, the notion of “deliberative citizenship” put forward in Fernando Tenório’s work.

Although this issue of Cadernos EBAPE.BR is not one of our thematic issues, the articles published are somehow connected, dealing with similar problems. This is a fortunate coincidence that we hope will offer a pleasant read and ideas for fruitful research.

REFERENCE

• TENÓRIO, F. G. Tem Razão A Administração?: Ensaios de Teoria Organizacional e Gestão Social. 4. ed. Ijuí: Unijuí, 2016.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  Jan-Mar 2019
• Date of issue
  Mar 2019