Marxist-based critique of OR: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Marxist-based critique of OR (view source)

Revision as of 13:23, 3 February 2023

57 bytes added ,  3 February 2023
m
no edit summary
(added refs)
mNo edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
The main Marxist arguments' were directed largely at technical rather than practical OR, and can be summarized as follows:
Hales (1974), 
Rosenhead and Thunhurst (1982), as well as Wood and Kelly (1978) critiqued OR using Marxist arguments. Their critique focused at technical rather than practical aspects.


<u>Point 1</u>:  OR has a mistaken view of its own purpose and rationality. It sees itself as an objective, value- free application of science to the common good. In fact, it is neither objective nor value-free, but a part of the developing means of production, committed to improving the effective use and control of the workforce.
<u>Point 1</u>:  OR has a mistaken view of its own purpose and rationality. It sees itself as an objective, value- free application of science to the common good. In fact, it is neither objective nor value-free, but a part of the developing means of production, committed to improving the effective use and control of the workforce.
Line 5: Line 6:
<u>Point 2</u>:  Indeed, far from being neutral, OR is ideological - it suppresses open discussion and con- sideration of ends and values in favour of a technical selection of efficient means. It trades on the label 'scientific' to justify particular, instrumental, values.
<u>Point 2</u>:  Indeed, far from being neutral, OR is ideological - it suppresses open discussion and con- sideration of ends and values in favour of a technical selection of efficient means. It trades on the label 'scientific' to justify particular, instrumental, values.


<u>Point 3</u>:  Where differing interests and values are recognized, as in Ackoff's work" 12, it is assumed that an agreeable reconciliation can always be reached. This is denied by critics'" 14 who argue that there are genuine, structural conflicts which cannot be resolved consensually, but
<u>Point 3</u>:  Where differing interests and values are recognized, as in Ackoff's work", it is assumed that an agreeable reconciliation can always be reached. This is denied by critics'" who argue that there are genuine, structural conflicts which cannot be resolved consensually, but only through the exercise of power. Apparent agreement will, in reality, maintain the status quo.
only through the exercise of power. Apparent agreement will, in reality, maintain the status
quo.


(Source: Minger, 1992)
(Source: Minger, 1992)
Retrieved from "https://www.dialogicdesignscience.info/w/Special:MobileDiff/725"

Navigation menu