Organization Theory originated from questioning and influence of studies by sociologists and economists who sought to understand a new form of social production organization, marked by the bureaucratic entrepreneurship and capitalism, in a context similar to the Industrial Revolution. Two major lines of thoughts are the bases for the organizational thinking (Hatch, 1997). The first one, composed of sociologists such as Max Weber, Emile Durkheim and Karl Marx, focused on “changes in the form and role played by formal organizations in society and the great influence of industrialization on the nature of work and its consequences for the workers” (Hatch, 1997, p. 27). The second line of thought comes from reflections of more contemporary authors who formed the Classical School of Administration, among whom we can highlight: Frederick Taylor and Henri Fayol. A managerial and pragmatic approach, aimed at the increase of the industrial organization productivity, can be mentioned as a characteristic of the second line. According to Fligstein (2001), a third matrix of thinking related to the studies of organizations is found in the economy. It originates from the development of theories such as The Firm Theory and later, the Agency Theory, whose approaches of analysis are amplified when compared to the Classical School approach, since the concern is not the organization itself and its internal mechanisms, but its existence and interrelationship in a larger economic context.

Along the historical development of the Organizational Theory field, different paradigms have emerged, embracing particular world views and science’s frameworks (Morgan, 2005). Although there is some diversity, we can see a process of legitimation and favoring of some ideas, which prioritizes a more pragmatic and functionalist perspective of the organizational phenomenon, shadowing critical and sociological approaches. It is revealing, in that sense, that according to a study carried out by Davel and Alcadipani (2003), only 2% of the papers published in five very well regarded business journals during the 1990s decade had a critical perspective.

Seeking to contribute to overcoming this epistemological gap, our analytical efforts in this theoretical essay aim at the following reflection: How would Organization Theory be conceived of from a critical sociological approach?

Considering a series of variations that this question can suggest (see Willmot, Bridgman & Alvesson, 2009), we will confine this questioning to the field of Marxist studies. This way, the questions to be answered would be: how does the Marxist approach conceive the organization and the organizational theory? How are classical and contemporary management theories (re)interpreted in the light of this referential?

To deal with these questions, we will start with a literature review, firstly recalling the fundamentals of the Marxist perspective, discussing its analysis on what remained and what concretely changed in the organizational world and in the world of work. Secondly, based on organizational literature authors and in the light of the Marxist perspective, our theoretical efforts will aim to understand which questions and social/economic concerns are concretely addressed by three important organizational theorists: Taylor, Ford and Ohno.

In conclusion, our analysis take us toward the following hypothesis: although the Toyotism has been presented as representing a novel model of work organization when compared to the Taylorism-Fordism, a critical analysis suggests that the difference between such models lies more in the appearance realm than in the phenomenon essence, since in the limit both turn to the same agenda of problems, concerns and interests.