Theoretical and intellectual grounding of classical and behavioral school dialogues in the literature of linguistic and organizational communication

Studies in organizational literature have led to the emergence of various approaches to organization. The first approach identified in organizational, sociological, and linguistic studies is the traditional approach, or the machine model, which views individuals and workgroups as machines performing fixed movements to accomplish tasks aimed at achieving a specific goal— namely, the efficient execution of work and the production of material goods. These tasks are not carried out in isolation but rather operate within a complex symphony of workers, interspersed with verbal linguistic communication, gestures, and symbols expressed by individuals and labor groups in factories, workshops, and various complex organizations that emerged during the European Renaissance. However, this rigid perspective resulted in the neglect of the communicative process, disregarding the fact that human beings possess emotions and feelings that they express through language—whether spoken via the vocal system or conveyed through gestures, signals, and symbols—creatively translating their meanings and emotions to others or in response to social situations. Therefore, we raise the following question: what hypotheses and ideas have the classical and behavioral schools put forward to analyze linguistic and symbolic communication phenomena within various human organizations?

The study of communication has evolved alongside the development of various organizational and administrative schools, leading to multiple theoretical approaches within administrative thought. One of the foundational frameworks is the Classical Traditional School, which encompasses theories such as scientific management , administrative divisions , and bureaucracy . This school is grounded in several key assumptions: it views the human being as a purely economic agent, perceives organizations as closed systems, treats tasks as routine and well-defined, and evaluates organizational success solely based on productivity and efficiency. Rooted in these assumptions, the classical school developed its theories through structured experiments and internal organizational studies, aiming to optimize operations and control. Among its most influential contributions are the theories of Frederick Taylor (Scientific Management), Henri Fayol (Administrative Theory), and Max Weber (Bureaucracy).

1-The Scientific Management Movement:

This theory emerged in the late 19th century through the efforts of Frederick Taylor and his colleagues Gilbreth, Gantt, and Emerson, who contributed to the development of management as a scientific discipline rather than relying on trial and error. However, the true founding father and spiritual leader of this school is Taylor, to the extent that it was named "Taylorism" after him.

Issue 2, Vol. 8, 2025, IMCRA

Taylor was working at an American steel and iron company when he observed that workers were producing less than their full potential. He also noticed the absence of a single, defined standard for expected productivity and a lack of a clear, consistent relationship between output and wages. As a result of his focused and intensive observations, he aimed to develop scientific methods and techniques to improve performance. Over several years, he conducted experiments, breaking down tasks into smaller elements and measuring the time required for each one. He also analyzed job processes. Thanks to his focus on studying motion and time, he succeeded in increasing worker productivity compared to pre-study levels. He was able to achieve his goals, which included raising wages, increasing productivity, and reducing costs. Taylor eventually developed four principles of scientific management:

• •    Replacing trial and error with scientific and logical analysis in the field of performance and work.

• •    Selecting, educating, and training workers through scientific methods to improve their performance, instead of relying on the old method where supervisors played this role.

• •    Promoting cooperation between management and workers to implement tasks in a scientific manner.

• •    Dividing work and responsibilities between management and workers, with management taking charge of planning and workers handling execution.(Diaa, 2001, p. 71)

Although Taylor introduced the scientific method into management, he focused primarily on the elements of productivity efficiency and treated the individual as a mechanical machine assigned to perform tasks without question. He believed that a worker’s behavior should align strictly with job requirements. This theory is also criticized for emphasizing economic incentives as the sole motivator for workers, while neglecting the human aspect and non-material incentives in administrative communication. Under this model, communication followed a one-way path with centralized decision-making, separating the functions of planning and execution—superior and subordinate. As a result, communication was limited to written documents issued by the manager, while the executor merely received orders without the opportunity to modify them or apply personal experience.

Scientific management views communication as a means to facilitate leadership and control within the organization through vertical channels. It also emphasizes that communication should be formal, sequential, and planned, with the goal of completing tasks and increasing productivity. The Taylorists believed that communication.

Communication, in their view, is one-way and vertical, flowing from top to bottom, and is solely related to the work. The only exception they allowed was for feedback, represented by periodic reports that must be provided to the center through written means, which ascend the

Sci. Educ. Innov. Context Mod. Probl. P-ISSN: 2790-0169 E-ISSN: 2790-0177 Issue 2, Vol. 8, 2025, IMCRA hierarchy via weak channels while descending from the top of the pyramid through a strong series of loud signals.

2-The Theory of Organizational Management – Administrative Divisions

This theory is attributed to the Frenchman Henri Fayol, who focused on administrative tasks in terms of describing and analyzing functions and defining organizational principles. Fayol's writings emphasize two main aspects: the principles of management and its functions. Fayol established fourteen (14) principles based on his treatment of the administrative process at the level of managers and large organizations. These principles include:

• •    Division of Labor: According to Fayol, specialization is natural, meaning that each worker specializes in a simple part of the work process, allowing them to practice and master it. This requires simplifying and analyzing tasks into their basic components, which results in an increase in performance levels and, consequently, production quantity.

• •    Authority and Responsibility: Fayol defined authority as "the right to give orders and the ability to enforce obedience." He distinguished between two types of authority: authority derived from a person's position in the organizational structure—legal authority—and authority derived from the individual’s own personality and experience—charismatic authority. He also believed that responsibility is a natural consequence of authority, and therefore, there must be a balance between the two. To be held accountable for a specific task, one must be granted the sufficient authority to carry it out. In other words, he emphasized that responsibility should align with authority. (Ali, 2004)

• •    Discipline (System): It is manifested in the form of agreements that are respected and allow for defining relationships between different groups and departments within the organization. System takes the form of rules and procedures governing these relationships across various organizational levels. To be respected, they must be written down and clear.

• •    Unity of Command: This principle dictates that a worker or employee should receive instructions from only one superior, rather than several, to avoid sources of conflict between individuals and departments.

• •    Unity of Direction: This principle emphasizes that there should be one leader and one plan for each group of related activities aimed at achieving a common goal. This is considered a

  Issue 2, Vol. 8, 2025, IMCRA

necessary condition for coordinating forces and unifying efforts. It also pertains to the relationships between workers and their superiors within the organizational structure.

• •    Subordination of Individual Interest to General Interest: This means that when personal goals conflict with collective goals, the general goals must take precedence over individual ones.

• •    Compensation or Reward for Individuals: Compensation should be based on the services provided by the individuals, ensuring their job satisfaction.

• •    Centralization: In Fayol’s view, the centralization of work division is something required by the logic of nature. This principle relates to the degree of concentration of authority at higher levels of the organization’s management. According to Fayol, it should always be considered, but it requires taking into account the specific conditions of the organization and the competence of its employees. For example, an organization in its early stages of operation requires as much concentration of authority as possible to define its direction clearly, while in larger organizations, there should be a gradual shift towards decentralization, where employees are granted a degree of autonomy based on their competence and ability to innovate.

• •    Hierarchy of Authority: Fayol relied on the principle of hierarchy of authority in organizing and managing the organization, to establish scientific and logical foundations for the transfer of information and communication through different levels of authority within the organization. However, Fayol realized that relying on the principles of hierarchy and unity of command often led to many problems in communication with salespeople. Therefore, it was necessary to find a common superior. This superior would not be a unit head, department head, or even the head of accounts or sales, but rather the general manager, as shown in Figure (6). This would create unnecessary burdens and efforts for various administrative parties. Thus, Fayol introduced the principle of "administrative bypass" to clarify the possibility of communication between the accountant and the salesperson with the approval of their direct supervisor.

• •    Order: It is necessary to organize both material and human inputs, with the goal of achieving efficiency in material inputs and preventing waste, as well as placing the right person in the right position. This requires proper organization and appropriate selection.

• •    Equity and Justice: This principle involves applying various rules, laws, and procedures enacted by the organization based on equality for all employees, which leads to the unleashing of creative potential and an increase in performance levels.

• •    Job Stability for Employees: This involves strengthening the relationship between employees, managers, and the organization for a long period of time.

• •    Initiative: This is considered one of the essential qualities that should be ingrained in the worker's mindset. It means the ability to create and innovate, and this trait becomes a source of strength for the organization if the manager can develop and nurture it in their assistants.

Sci. Educ. Innov. Context Mod. Probl. P-ISSN: 2790-0169 E-ISSN: 2790-0177 Issue 2, Vol. 8, 2025, IMCRA

• •    Team Spirit: This refers to unifying efforts and working through harmony of interests and goals.

This is done by adopting the policy of unity of command and the policy of oral communications. In addition to the general principles, Fayol proposed five basic functions for management and managers, which are:

• •    Planning: This involves all activities undertaken by the manager, during which a work plan is developed.

• •    Organizing: This refers to activities related to arranging economic resources to achieve the organization's goals at the lowest cost.(Hamdi, 1981, p. 32)

• •    Commanding: This means directing the efforts of subordinates and workers within the organization.

• •    Coordinating: This refers to aligning the efforts of employees within the organization into one cohesive effort to achieve the organization’s overall goal.

• •    Controlling: This involves ensuring that the practical efforts are in harmony with the plans that have been developed.

Fayol's activities were followed by "Mony and Alan Riley," who were interested in the principles of organization and sought to establish principles and foundations for it. They noticed that in all organizations, there is the principle of hierarchy related to the organizational work sequence. Even if the organizational structure differs from one organization to another, this principle exists in all of them, in two branches: the first is the hierarchy of authority, and the second is the distribution and division of labor. The main goal of management is to distribute tasks and powers among the workers in the organization in order to achieve the maximum level of productivity.

Mony also discussed some basic principles of organization, such as coordination, hierarchy, and delegation of authority. He explained that the stages of management are: planning, organizing, and controlling, with each stage having its own guiding principle. Planning is directed by the principle of forecasting, organizing by the principle of coordination, and controlling by the principle of commanding (Rawya, 2001). He also identified a number of subsidiary functions related to the controlling function, including recruitment, selection, and appointment. He emphasized that the direct results of managers performing their functions are the achievement of: order and stability, initiative, etc.

This theory suggests that there is an optimal way to organize work by aligning human and material resources while considering the relationship between members of the organization. However, it also neglected the communication aspect within the organization, as decisions are based solely on authority and direct orders from the manager to implement plans. It relies on a direct formal approach and bureaucracy. Thus, the relationships within the organization are

Issue 2, Vol. 8, 2025, IMCRA between positions, not between individuals holding those positions,(Hamdi, 1981, p. 33), which causes the organization to lack effective communication and its role within it.

• 3-    Bureaucratic Theory

  This theory is attributed to the German thinker Max Weber (1864-1920), who sought to explain the reason behind the superiority of European countries and America over Germany. He developed a conceptualization of the development of societies, dividing the stages that characterize society into three phases:

• •    Traditional authority stage

• •    Charismatic authority stage

• •    Legal authority stage

  The organization’s objectives were defined as providing beneficial services to clients. It emphasized a set of basic principles, such as the division of labor and specialization, to regulate workers' behavior and increase performance levels. The clarity of authority lines through hierarchical structures was also stressed, with greater clarity leading to increased organizational effectiveness. The system of merit-based appointments and promotions for employees was recommended, along with clear instructions and rules for workflow. There was also a focus on documentation and organizing records and documents, as well as ensuring fair wages and compensation for workers.(Ahmed, 2000)

Although Weber contributed to building one of the fundamental pillars of an organization, namely the organizational structure, and despite his focus on the career path of employees—where the hierarchical organization creates several functional positions that an individual can ascend to, earn higher wages, and take on greater responsibilities, thus motivating them to improve their performance—bureaucracy strips the individual of their psychological, social, and intellectual components. It views behavior in the workplace as determined solely by the job requirements and nothing more. A drawback of this approach is that the communication line must generally move downward in the form of orders, instructions, and guidance in most areas, which leads to decisionmaking centralization at the upper administrative levels,(Nasser, p. 31)

Preventing opportunities for communication to flow upward from the bottom to the top. This theory focuses on formal communication channels and emphasizes written communication as an essential tool for archiving and documenting the organization’s work. Another criticism of this theory is that it considers the organization as a closed system, not interacting with its environment.

A- The Behavioral School

This school emerged as a reaction to the classical school, accusing it of neglecting the human element. It began with the Hawthorne studies conducted by Elton Mayo, which emphasized the

Issue 2, Vol. 8, 2025, IMCRA importance of the internal dynamics of groups, the significance of informal groups, and the influence of social factors.

Such an exchange requires an understanding of the psychological and social composition of both the receiver and the sender. The receiver, like the sender, is made up of a complex mix of desires, expectations, foundations, values, and problems. The words to be exchanged carry specific symbols, and for communication to occur, an individual must form a mental image of the thing, assign it a name, and develop feelings toward it. The other person, on the opposite side, must be alerted to that name or idea and must feel it if the communication is to be effective.

McGregor's Administrative Philosophy Theory: is based on the idea that organizational behavior reflects specific organizational theories, with each manager having a unique perspective they try to impose on others within the organization. These philosophical beliefs are key determinants of organizational behavior, and members' actions are responses to these guiding philosophies. McGregor criticized classical organizational theories for focusing on negative aspects and for misunderstanding human nature, especially through principles considered by some to be natural laws. He observed that classical theories were often based on models of organizations like military or religious groups, which are not applicable to modern organizations, leading to the conclusion that such principles cannot be universally applied.

The classical theory views organizational problems as a closed system, thus neglecting the impact of the external environment and its components on organizational behavior. Classical theories are based on a set of assumptions about the determinants of organizational behavior, especially in interpreting motivation. For example, authority is considered the only means of

Sci. Educ. Innov. Context Mod. Probl. P-ISSN: 2790-0169 E-ISSN: 2790-0177 Issue 2, Vol. 8, 2025, IMCRA influencing individual behavior, but there are other forms of influence, such as persuasion or coercion. Similarly, the official position is not the sole source of authority, as authority can also stem from an informal position.

McGregor focused on studying the role of the manager within the organization, adopting a critical approach to classical theory. He examined individual behavior and its relationship with the organization, aiming to prepare managers to manage various organizations while aligning individual goals with organizational objectives. Through his research, McGregor developed two theories within the behavioral direction: Theory X and Theory Y, which are assumptions or perceptions about employee motivation and behavior.

Theory X: This theory is based on a set of assumptions about the nature of human behavior, derived from classical thought in the fields of control and direction. It is summarized in the following elements:

• -    The average person naturally dislikes work and strives to avoid it whenever possible. This idea has been ingrained in the worker's mind for a long time, which is why most managers believe in this notion and consider it an unquestionable truth.(Mohamed & Mehdi, 1993, p. 71)

Based on this assumption, and as a result of the inherent dislike for work, most individuals must be coerced into working, monitored, directed, and subjected to an authoritarian management style to achieve the organization's goals. This requires the presence of a motivation system that helps direct various efforts to achieve the set objectives. However, despite the harsh treatment, encouragement and rewards remain insufficient to increase productivity, as the greater the reward, the more demand there is for it. Therefore, the threat of dismissal and authoritarian control is seen as the solution to the problem and normal management.

• -    The average person avoids responsibility and prefers to receive guidance from others. Additionally, they have little ambition, limited capabilities, and seek safety and stability above all else.

Analysis of the assumptions: The assumption that the individual is rational in their behavior and is motivated primarily by economic factors aimed at maximizing income contradicts the human motivations outlined by McGregor. It provides an incorrect explanation of individual behavior and work motivations. Therefore, McGregor's approach is based on the needs hierarchy introduced by psychologist Abraham Maslow. These needs are classified in a pyramid, with physiological needs at the base and self-actualization at the to

The formal organization based on the assumptions of Theory X: It provides individuals with limited opportunities to fulfill their social and personal needs. It is important to note that the need that is satisfied takes on the role of a motivator for behavior. Therefore, an increase in wages does not necessarily lead to an increase in productivity, which requires management to identify other

Issue 2, Vol. 8, 2025, IMCRA needs that are being satisfied. Here, we see a clear call to focus on human relations within the formal organization, ensuring better opportunities for individuals to achieve their desires.

It can also be said that Theory X does not describe human nature as much as it describes the effects resulting from the application of an administrative philosophy based on the principles of classical organization and its assumptions about human motivation.

Through Theory X, a framework is established that allows for better prediction and monitoring of human behavior within the industrial organization. This was done through the introduction of the alternative, Theory Y, which is fundamentally based on the principle of integrating the organization's goals with the individual's goals.

Theory Y integrates the organization's goals with the individual's goals : McGregor summarized the results of the studies and research of the Human Relations School and the developments in personnel management programs and labor relations policies in a theory he called Theory Y. This theory attempts to find the missing coordination between individual goals and organizational goals, and its assumptions are the opposite of those of Theory X.

• •    Humans, by nature, do not dislike work; on the contrary, they seek it. They have the ability to innovate and be creative, and they enjoy taking responsibility. This depends on the organization’s ability to provide a suitable work environment. Physical and mental effort in work is considered natural.

• •    The authoritarian style of control and the threat of punishment are not the only means to ensure proper guidance of individuals' efforts towards achieving goals. A person can practice selfcontrol and self-direction to achieve the goals they have committed to, as part of professional conscience.

• •    Individuals' commitment to the set goals depends on the credibility of the reward system applied and its connection to the achievement of these goals and the expected return once they are achieved.

• •    The current organizational structures are responsible for the partial use of the individual's latent creative capacities. Therefore, the inability to achieve organizational goals often does not stem from a lack of individual ability or integration into the work, but rather from deficiencies in the organizational structure that fail to uncover these hidden capacities.

Analysis of these hypotheses: The principle of integration is considered an ideal that is not easy to grasp or control in the short term, but in the long term, it becomes a possible process. For example, the hypothesis of self-monitoring and self-management has become a feature of modern administrative systems because the sense of responsibility leads to the effective achievement of the organization's goals.

This theory also believes that management control by managers is, in itself, the proper exploitation of human creative energies. Hence, good management of the organization leads to

Issue 2, Vol. 8, 2025, IMCRA positive results. From this, we conclude that human behavior is merely an expression of the method and approach of the organization’s structure, which emphasizes the need for integration between the organization's goals and the individual's goals. In other words, it is essential to first consider the needs that the worker aims to satisfy, as they allow him to direct all his energies toward serving the organization's set goals.

Through McGregor's theory, a framework was established that allows for better prediction and monitoring of behavior, which is fundamentally based on the human principle (Y) within the industrial organization. This was achieved by proposing an alternative theory based on the integration of the organization's goals with the individual's goals.

It can also be said that Theory Y did not adequately address the systematic analysis of human behavior within the organization, the role of leadership in guidance, the nature of individuals' needs, and their relationship with motivation and group behaviors.

The principle of balance between Theory X and Y: From the above, we observe that the two theories differ in terms of their perspective on the nature and exploitation of human potential and labor relations within the organization, or rather, management. Theory X relies on an authoritarian control style, based on the principle of hierarchy, while Theory Y focuses on providing the appropriate framework to achieve personal goals, and thus the organization's goals, with an emphasis on self-control for each member. To achieve alignment between the individual's goals and the organization's goals, the following should be followed:

• •    Clarifying the general requirements of the job, which can be expressed in a work procedures manual.

• •    Precision in defining goals within their temporal and spatial framework.

• •    Directing the management process.

• •    Evaluating results.

We also notice that these steps closely align with what is known as management by objectives. Additionally, McGregor emphasized the importance of leadership, participation, and management development in creating an organizational environment that allows the application of the principle of integration between the individual and the organization.

A- The Social System School: This approach represents a system of interrelated cultural relationships, meaning that this social system encompasses interconnected layers of individuals' cultural and civilizational backgrounds. Therefore, what is required is to uncover the civilizational clusters within the organization, i.e., the groups that share similar culture and civilization, and work to unite these groups into a single crucible or integrated social system. The core belief in the Social System School is the need to overcome the biological, material, and social constraints of the individual and their environment through cooperation. Many proponents of this school use the

Issue 2, Vol. 8, 2025, IMCRA concept of the cooperative system, which is commonly referred to as formal organization. According to this concept, a formal organization is any cooperative system where individuals are capable of communicating with one another and are willing to contribute to the work toward achieving a common goal.

• B- Chester Barnard's Theory of Cooperative Systems:

Barnard defined the organization as a system of cooperation, with this cooperation directed towards achieving the goals set by the organization. His perspective extended to studying individuals and how to motivate them. This view was based on the aspect of needs, specifically what the organization can provide for the individual, such as good working conditions and social benefits. He considered leadership as a key factor in achieving alignment between the individual's goals and the organization's goals. He also referred to the principle of delegating authority, but from the bottom up, unlike classical theory. This means that the worker delegates authority to their superior, which implies acceptance of their orders.

Chester Barnard is considered one of the practitioner-researchers who gave a new boost to the growth of this thought through his various contributions. In order to reach an appropriate definition of the nature of the administrative process, Barnard developed what is called the theory of cooperation, which is based on the idea that satisfying the individual's natural and social needs necessitates cooperation with others.

From this, Barnard's definition of the content of formal organization is based on the idea that it is a system of interconnected and independent activities or personal forces of different groups of individuals who all work under patterns of direction to achieve common goals.

This definition applies to various organizations, regardless of the nature of their activity, and Barnard builds a theory of formal organization based on the existence of three main elements:

• •    A common goal as the central axis that brings together the members of the organization.

• •    The possibility of communication between members of the organization.

• •    The desire to work and contribute within the framework of the organization.

From this, we conclude that any organization is a cooperative system, and its effectiveness depends on the degree of cooperation among its members. Its continuity is linked to the achievement of its goals. According to Barnard, the emergence of an organization occurs through one of the following methods:

• •    Spontaneous emergence.

• •    Purposeful emergence initiated by humans.

• •    Emergence due to the expansion or merging of existing organizations.

• •    Emergence due to separation from already existing organizations.

Sci. Educ. Innov. Context Mod. Probl. P-ISSN: 2790-0169 E-ISSN: 2790-0177 Issue 2, Vol. 8, 2025, IMCRA

The phenomenon of growth is an inherent characteristic of organizations, and the size is determined by a set of factors, the most important of which are:

• •   The intertwining of goals.

• •   The level of technological development.

• •    Barriers to communication between parts of the organization.

• •    The complexity of personal interactions between members of the organization.

Many researchers consider Barnard to be the originator of the fundamental theory of communication, as he was one of the first to explain, critique, and examine the nature, components, and characteristics of communication, and its relationship with the system of formal and informal organizational authority. In his book The Functions of the Executive , Barnard presents a set of ideas related to the topic of communication, which are:

C- Barnard defines formal organization as a collection of complex physical and biological components that are connected by a special relationship, as well as the social and personal components. Based on this, Barnard did not limit the organization to a set of rules and procedures but gave it a cooperative nature and linked it to the social content. According to this, the organization is connected to the following basic components:

• •   The tangible material aspect.

• •   The social aspect.

• •   The characteristics of individuals.

• •   Other variables.

The informal organization includes things that are not perceived and may contradict the actions of the formal organization. It plays two roles of influence:

Establishing certain behaviors, habits, and traditions.

• •    It may contribute to creating an atmosphere that the formal organization can exploit in its work.

From the above, it is clear that Barnard believes that informal communication is a significant contributor to creating new environments that the organization can leverage to enhance its performance in the future.

Barnard considers that informal organizations may be the cause of the emergence of formal organizations, and that the latter is essential for any large social organization. He even considers informal organizations as a means of communication and a contribution to individual cooperation.

C- The role of technology in communication: Barnard believes that the lack of appropriate technology for communication may eliminate the possibility of adopting and achieving certain goals, which are considered the purpose of establishing the organization in the first place.

D- Barnard emphasizes the importance of maintaining the communication system for the organization's                                                                   performance:

Issue 2, Vol. 8, 2025, IMCRA

From this, the executive body must undertake this task as a strategic operation, by selecting employees who will handle communication control tasks.

In general, Barnard believes that informal organizations may contribute in some way to protecting the dignity of the individual and ensuring their rights from the abuses of the formal organization. He asserts that a successful organization is one that provides employees with an adequate level of satisfaction and fulfillment of the following general motives that drive an individual to join the organization, the most important of which are:

• •    Mutual communication

• •    Harmony with colleagues

• •    Participation

• •    Adapting working conditions to the habits and behavior of the individual

• •    It is also noted that Barnard extensively discussed communication, especially informal communication, as an inseparable part of the human and social nature of employees, which must exist in any organization. Barnard also linked the nature of communications and their relationship to decision-making, whether the communication was upward or downward.

Conclusion

The evolution of organizations has led to the emergence of various modern topics, ranging from formal to informal structures, legal rules to customs and traditions, organizational frameworks to human-centered organizational cultures, mechanical and organic solidarity to implementation capabilities, organizational efficiency to mechanical capacity, human labor to automation, and from workgroups to advanced technologies. All these elements rely on a complex system of communication—formal and informal, traditional and modern, mechanical and technological. Classical school thought viewed communication as a purely formal process with strict hierarchical control, while the behavioral school introduced a more human-centric perspective, emphasizing emotions, shared understanding, and symbolic language among workers and groups. Today, theoretical approaches continue to analyze and refine organizational thought in response to rapid advancements in technology, digitalization, and high-speed innovation in our modern world.