‫ﺝﺎﻡﻌﺔ ﻓﻴﻼدﻟﻔﻴــــﺎ‬

‫آﻠﻴﺔ اﻟﻌﻠﻮم اﻹداریﺔ واﻟﻤﺎﻟﻴﺔ‬

‫إﺳﺘﺮاﺗﻴﺠﻴﺎت اﻷﻋﻤﺎل ﻓﻲ‬

‫ﻡﻮاﺝﻬﺔ ﺗﺤﺪیﺎت اﻟﻌﻮﻟﻤﺔ‬
‫ﺇﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﻓﻲ ﻅل ﺍﻟﻌﻭﻟﻤﺔ ﻤﻔﺎﻀﻠﺔ ﺒﻴﻥ " ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻼﺨﻁﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺃ‪.‬ﺩ‪ .‬ﻋﺎﺼﻡ ﺍﻷﻋﺭﺠﻲ ‪ /‬ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻓﻴﻼﺩﻟﻔﻴﺎ‪/‬ﺍﻻﺭﺩﻥ‬

‫‪15 – 16/3/2005‬‬
‫‪1‬‬
‫‪http:// www.philadelphia.edu.jo‬‬
‫‪http:// www.philadelphia.edu.jo‬‬
 "‫ﺇﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﻓﻲ ﻅل ﺍﻟﻌﻭﻟﻤﺔ " ﻤﻨﻬﺞ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻭﻤﻨﻬﺞ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻼﺨﻁﻴﺔ‬

‫ ﺠﺎﻤﻌﺔ ﻓﻴﻼﺩﻟﻔﻴﺎ‬/ ‫ﻋﺎﺼﻡ ﺍﻷﻋﺭﺠﻲ‬

‫ﺍﻟﻤﻠﺨﺹ‬

‫ﻫﺩﻑ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻫﻭ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﺭﻱ ﻋﻥ ﻤﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﺒﺩﻴﻠﺔ ﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﻓﻲ ﻋﺼﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﻭﻟﻤﺔ‬
‫ﺇﻥ ﺘﺯﺍﻴﺩ ﺃﻋﺩﺍﺩ ﻭﺘﻨﻭﻉ ﻭﺸﺩﺓ ﺃﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﻓﺘﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻭل ﻏﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻤﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﺩﻴﺩ ﺒﺠﺎﻨﺏ ﻤﺤﺩﻭﺩﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﻫﺞ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺇﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﻜﺎﻨﺕ ﺍﻻﺴﺒﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﺭﺌﻴﺴﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻘﻴﺎﻡ ﺒﻬﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻅﻬﺭ ﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴل ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﺃﻓﻀﻠﻴﺔ ﻤﻨﺎﻫﺞ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻼﺨﻁﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺎﻤل ﻤﻊ ﺃﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﻋﺼﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﻭﻟﻤﺔ‬
‫ﺒﻨﻔﺱ ﺍﻟﻭﻗﺕ ﺍﻅﻬﺭ ﻤﺴﻭﺤﺎﺕ ﺍﻻﺩﺒﻴﺎﺕ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺒﻴﻥ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺔ ﺘﻨﺎﻤﻲ ﺍﻻﺘﺠﺎﻩ ﻨﺤﻭ ﺘﺒﻨﻲ ﺍﻟﻭﻗﺎﺌﻴﺔ ﺒﺠﺎﻨﺏ‬
.‫ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﻫﺞ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻼﺨﻁﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﻋﺼﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻭل ﻨﺤﻭ ﺍﻟﻌﻭﻟﻤﺔ‬

Abstract
Crisis management in the new world order:
Linear dynamics versus non-liner dynamics
Perspective
The objective of this study is to search for an alternative methodology for crisis
management during the present transformation towards the new world order.
The increasing, number, varieties, and intensities of crises in this period besides the
observed limitation linear dynamic approaches in crisis management were the major
reasons for carrying out this study
Finding of this analysis have given preference to non- linear dynamic approaches in
couping with the now. Crisis
Also the survey of the literature in the present study has pointed out an emerging
trends to wards immunative besides non- linear dynamic approaches in managing
NWD crisis.

2
 ‫ﻫﺩﻑ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺙ ﻭﺃﻫﻤﻴﺘﻪ‪:‬‬
‫ﻫﺩﻑ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺙ ﻫﻭ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﺭﻱ ﻋﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻷﻜﺜﺭ ﻓﺎﻋﻠﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺇﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﺤﻴﺙ ﺃﻥ ﻅﺎﻫﺭﺓ "ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺎﺕ"‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺘﺯﺍﻴﺩ ﻋﺩﺩﻴﹰﺎ ﻭﺘﻨﻭﻋﻴﹰﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﺼﺭ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻀﺭ… ﻋﺼﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻭل ﺇﻟﻰ ﻤﺎ ﻴﺴﻤﻰ "ﺒﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻡ ﺍﻟﺠﺩﻴﺩ" ﺃﻭ ﻋﺼﺭ‬
‫"ﺍﻟﻌﻭﻟﻤﺔ"… ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﻤل ﺃﻥ ﻴﺅﺩﻱ ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻬﺩﻑ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺘﻘﻠﻴﺹ ﻤﺎ ﻗﺩ ﻴﻨﺘﺞ ﻋﻥ ﺃﻴﺔ ﺃﺯﻤﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺴﻠﺒﻴﺎﺕ ﻭﺘﻌﻅﻴﻡ ﻤﺎ‬
‫ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺃﻥ ﻴﺘﺤﻘﻕ ﻤﻥ ﺇﻴﺠﺎﺒﻴﺎﺕ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻤﺭ ﺒﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﺃﺯﻤﻭﻴﺔ ﺴﻭﺍﺀ ﻜﺎﻨﺕ ﺤﻜﻭﻤﺔ ﺃﻭ ﺸﺭﻜﺔ ﺃﻭ‬
‫ﺒﻨﻙ ﺃﻭ ﻤﺴﺘﺸﻔﻰ ﻭﻤﺎ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺫﻟﻙ‪.‬‬

‫ﻤﺸﻜﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺙ‪:‬‬
‫ﻤﺸﻜﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺙ ﻫﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺭﻑ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻷﻜﺜﺭ ﺠﺩﻭﻯ ﻓﻲ ﺇﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﻓﻲ ﻋﺼﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻭل ﻨﺤﻭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﻭﻟﻤﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻭﻗﺕ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﺘﺘﻌﺩﺩ ﻭﺘﺘﺒﺎﻴﻥ ﻓﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﻫﺞ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺎل ﻭﺘﻨﻜﻤﺵ ﻓﻴﻪ ﺇﻤﻜﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻜﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻴﺩﺍﻨﻲ ﻓﻲ‬
‫ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﻜﻤﺎ ﺤﺩﺙ ﻤﺅﺨﺭﹰﺍ ﻓﻲ ﺃﺯﻤﺔ ﺯﻟﺯﺍل "ﺘﺴﻭﻨﺎﻤﻲ" ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻴﻁ ﺍﻟﻬﻨﺩﻱ ﻓﻲ )‪ (2005‬ﻭﻤﺎ ﺴﻴﺘﺭﺘﺏ ﻋﻠﻴﻬﺎ‪.‬‬

‫ﺃﺴﺌﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺙ‪:‬‬
‫ﻫل ﻤﻥ ﺃﻓﻀﻠﻴﺔ "ﻟﻤﻨﻬﺞ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻴﺔ" ﻋﻠﻰ "ﻤﻨﻬﺞ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻼﺨﻁﻴﺔ" ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﻌﻜﺱ ﻓﻲ ﺇﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺎﺕ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﻋﺼﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻭل ﻨﺤﻭ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻤﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﺩﻴﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻓﺘﺭﺍﺽ ﺃﻥ ﻫﺫﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻬﺠﻴﻥ ﻴﻤﺜﻼﻥ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻘﻁﺎﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﺭﺌﻴﺴﻴﻴﻥ‬
‫ﻟﻤﺨﺘﻠﻑ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﻫﺞ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺘﻤﺩﺓ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺎل‪.‬‬

‫ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ‪:‬‬
‫ﺴﻴﺘﻡ ﺘﻭﻀﻴﺢ ﻭﺘﺤﻠﻴل ﻤﻀﺎﻤﻴﻥ ﻜل ﻤﻥ "ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺔ" ﻭ "ﺍﻟﻌﻭﻟﻤﺔ" ﻭ "ﻤﻨﻬﺞ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻴﺔ ﻭﻤﻨﻬﺞ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻼﺨﻁﻴﺔ" ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺎﺕ ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﺒﻴﻨﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺇﻁﺎﺭ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﺘﺨﺎﺫ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ‪ ،‬ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻌﺘﺒﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻭﺩ ﺍﻟﻔﻘﺭﻱ ﻷﻱ ﺘﻨﻅﻴﻡ‬
‫ﻻ ﺜﻡ ﺴﻴﺼﺎﺭ ﺇﻟﻰ‬
‫)‪ ،(Simon, 1993, 1957‬ﻭﻓﻲ ﺇﻁﺎﺭ ﻨﻅﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﻡ )‪ .(Shafritz & Ott, 1992‬ﺃﻭ ﹰ‬
‫ﺍﺴﺘﻌﺭﺍﺽ ﻭﺘﺤﻠﻴل ﻋﺩﺩﹰﺍ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺎﻫﺞ ﻓﻲ ﺇﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺘﻤﺩﺓ ﻤﻴﺩﺍﻨﻴﹰﺎ ﻭﻜﻤﺎ ﺘﻌﺭﻀﻪ ﺍﻷﺩﺒﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺎﺤﺔ ﺫﺍﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺇﻁﺎﺭ ﻤﻴﻠﻬﺎ ﻨﺤﻭ "ﻤﻨﻬﺞ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻴﺔ" ﺃﻭ ﻨﺤﻭ "ﻤﻨﻬﺞ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻼﺨﻁﻴﺔ" ﺜﺎﻨﻴﹰﺎ ﻭﻤﻥ ﺜﻡ ﺼﻴﺎﻏﺔ‬
‫ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻨﺘﺎﺠﺎﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻭﺼﻴﺎﺕ‪.‬‬

‫ﺘﺤﻠﻴل ﻤﻀﺎﻤﻴﻥ "ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺔ"‪" ،‬ﺍﻟﻌﻭﻟﻤﺔ"‪" ،‬ﻤﻨﻬﺞ" "ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻴﺔ" ﻭ"ﻤﻨﻬﺞ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻼﺨﻁﻴﺔ" ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺎﺕ ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﺒﻴﻨﻬﺎ‪:‬‬

‫ﺘﺤﻠﻴل ﻤﻀﺎﻤﻴﻥ "ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺔ"‪:‬‬ ‫ﻻ‪:‬‬

‫ﺃﻭ ﹰ‬
‫ﻋﺭﻓﺕ ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﻠﻐﺔ ﺍﻟﻴﻭﻨﻴﺎﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺩﻴﻤﺔ ﺒـ )‪ (Kipvew‬ﺒﻌﻨﻰ "ﻟﺘﻘﺭﺭ" ﻓﻲ ﻤﻀﻤﻭﻥ ﻤﺎ ﻗﺩ ﻴﺅﺩﻱ ﺇﻟﻴﻪ‬
‫ﻤﺭﺽ ﻤﺴﺘﻌﺼﻲ ﻤﻥ ﻤﻭﺕ ﺃﻭ ﺸﻔﺎﺀ )‪ .(Bucha, 1996‬ﺃﻤﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻠﻐﺔ ﺍﻟﺼﻴﻨﻴﺔ ﻓﻌﺭﻓﺕ ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺔ ﺒـ)‪(Wet- Ji‬‬
‫ﺃﻱ "ﺍﻟﺨﻁﺭ" ﻭ "ﺍﻟﻔﺭﺼﺔ"‪) .‬ﺍﻟﻁﻴﺏ‪ .(1990 ،‬ﻭﻋﺭﻓﻬﺎ )‪ (Bieber, 1988‬ﺒﺄﻨﻬﺎ "ﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﺘﺤﻭل ﻓﻲ ﺃﻭﻀﺎﻉ ﻏﻴﺭ‬

‫‪3‬‬
‫ﻤﺴﺘﻘﺭﺓ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺃﻥ ﺘﻘﻭﺩ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻨﺘﺎﺌﺞ ﺴﻠﺒﻴﺔ ﺇﺫﺍ ﻟﻡ ﺘﻌﺘﻤﺩ ﺃﺴﺎﻟﻴﺏ ﺠﺩﻴﺩﺓ ﻻﺤﺘﻭﺍﺌﻬﺎ"‪ .‬ﻫﺫﺍ ﺒﺠﺎﻨﺏ ﺘﻌﺎﺭﻴﻑ ﻤﺘﻌﺩﺩﺓ ﺃﺨﺭﻯ‬
‫ﻭﺭﺩﺕ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻷﺩﺒﻴﺎﺕ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﻤﺅﺨﺭﹰﺍ ﻤﺜل ;‪(Phelps, 1986; Milburn, 1983; Gladwin, 1987‬‬
‫)‪ .Ford, 1987‬ﻭﻟﻔﺭﺽ ﺘﺠﻨﺏ ﺍﻟﺨﻭﺽ ﻓﻲ ﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺎﺕ ﻭﻤﻔﺎﻀﻼﺕ ﺒﻴﻥ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺎﺭﻴﻑ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺒﺎﻴﻨﺔ ﻟﻸﺯﻤﺔ ﻭﺭﻏﺒﺔ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺘﺄﻜﻴﺩ ﺍﻟﻤﻀﺎﻤﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻭﻅﻴﻔﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﻟﻬﺎ ﻷﻏﺭﺍﺽ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺙ… ﺴﺘﻌﺭﻑ ﻀﻤﻥ ﺇﻁﺎﺭ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﺘﺨﺎﺫ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺒﺄﻨﻬﺎ‬
‫"ﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻼﺘﻨﺎﺴﺏ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺠﻴﺯﻱ ﺒﻴﻥ ﻫﺩﻑ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﻭﻭﺴﻴﻠﺘﻪ ﻓﻲ ﻅل ﻤﻌﻁﻴﺎﺕ ﺒﻴﺌﻴﺔ ﻤﻌﻴﻨﺔ"… ﻭﺒﺎﻟﺘﺎﻟﻲ ﻓﺎﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﻌﺎﻨﻲ ﻤﻥ ﺃﺯﻤﺔ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺃﻥ ﻴﻌﺭﻑ ﺒﺄﻥ ﺸﺒﻜﺔ ﺍﺘﺨﺎﺫ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺠﺴﻤﻪ ﺘﻌﺎﻨﻲ ﻤﻥ ﺤﺎﻻﺕ ﻻ‬
‫ﺘﻭﺍﺯﻥ ﺘﻌﺠﻴﺯﻱ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺃﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻭﻭﺴﺎﺌل ﻋﺩﺩﹰﺍ ﻤﻥ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﺍﺘﻬﺎ ﻤﻤﺎ ﻴﻨﻌﻜﺱ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﺴﻴﺭﺓ ﺇﺠﻤﺎﻟﻲ ﺫﻟﻙ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻨﺤﻭ ﻫﺩﻓﻪ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺘﻤﺩ‪.‬‬
‫ﺃﻤﺎ ﺃﺴﺒﺎﺏ ﺤﺩﻭﺙ ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﻓﻘﺩ ﺃﺸﺎﺭ )‪ (Shrivastava & Miroff, 1994‬ﺒﺄﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﻌﻭﺩ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺘﻔﺎﻋل‬
‫ﺍﻷﺨﻁﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺤﺩﺙ ﺩﺍﺨل ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻨﻲ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻐﻴﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺌﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺤﻴﻁ ﺒﻪ… ﺇﻀﺎﻓﺔ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻭﺠﻭﺩ ﺃﺴﺒﺎﺏ‬
‫ﺃﺨﺭﻯ ﻟﻸﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﻭﺭﺩﺕ ﻓﻲ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻷﺩﺒﻴﺎﺕ )ﺃﺒﻭ ﺍﻟﻨﺼﺭ‪1993 ،‬؛ ﺍﻟﺩﻫﺎﻥ‪1989 ،‬؛ ﺍﻟﺭﺍﺯﻡ‪ .(1995 ،‬ﻭﻴﻤﻜﻥ‬
‫ﺇﺠﻤﺎل ﻤﺎ ﺘﻘﺩﻡ ﺒﺎﻟﻘﻭل ﺃﻥ ﺃﺴﺒﺎﺏ ﻭﻗﻭﻉ ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﻗﺩ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﺃﺨﻁﺎﺀ ﺃﻭ ﺍﺨﺘﻼﻻﺕ ﺘﻘﻊ ﺒﻔﻌل ﺍﻹﻨﺴﺎﻥ ﺩﺍﺨل ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻨﻲ ﺃﻭ‪ /‬ﻭ ﻨﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﺍﺨﺘﻼﻻﺕ ﻭﺘﻐﻴﺭﺍﺕ ﺒﻴﺌﻴﺔ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ ﺒﺎﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﺫﻜﻭﺭ… ﻭﻏﺎﻟﺒﹰﺎ ﻤﺎ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﺘﻠﻙ‬
‫ﺍﻷﺴﺒﺎﺏ ﻏﻴﺭ ﻗﺎﺒﻠﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﻨﺒﺅ ﻭﺘﻌﺠﻴﺯﻴﺔ ﻀﻤﻥ ﺴﻴﺎﻗﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﺍﻻﻋﺘﻴﺎﺩﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻨﻲ‪.‬‬
‫ﻫﺫﺍ ﻭﺭﻏﻡ ﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻼﺘﻨﺎﺴﺏ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺠﻴﺯﻴﺔ ﺒﻴﻥ ﻫﺩﻑ ﻭﻭﺴﻴﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻤﻴﺯ ﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺔ ﺒﺼﻭﺭﺓ ﺭﺌﻴﺴﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻓﻘﺩ ﺘﺒﻘﻰ ﺘﻐﻴﺭﺍﺕ )ﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ( ﺫﻟﻙ ﺍﻟﻬﺩﻑ ﻭﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﻭﺴﻴﻠﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﺭﺘﺎﺒﻪ )ﺨﻁﻴﻪ( ﺤﻴﺙ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﺇﻤﻜﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺒﺅ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺤﻜﻡ‬
‫ﺒﺼﺩﺩﻫﺎ ﺃﻗل ﺘﻌﺠﻴﺯﹰﺍ… ﻤﻘﺎﺭﻨﺔ ﻤﻊ ﺍﺤﺘﻤﺎﻻﺕ ﺘﺤﻭل ﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻬﺩﻑ ﻭﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻭﺴﻴﻠﺔ‪ ،‬ﺒﻔﻌل ﺍﻟﻀﻐﻭﻁ ﺍﻟﻨﻔﺴﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻟﻠﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻷﺯﻤﻭﻴﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺃﺩﺍﺀ ﻤﺘﺨﺫﻱ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﻭﺒﻔﻌل ﻀﻐﻭﻁﺎﺕ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﻏﻴﺭ ﺍﻻﻋﺘﻴﺎﺩﻴﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻨﻲ‪ ،‬ﺇﻟﻰ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻼﺭﺘﺎﺒﺔ )ﺍﻟﻼﺨﻁﻴﺔ(… ﺤﻴﺙ ﺘﺩﺨل ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺴﻠﺴﻠﺔ ﻤﺘﻔﺎﻭﺘﺔ ﺍﻟﺸﺩﺓ ﻤﻥ ﺤﺎﻻﺕ "ﺍﻟﻼﺘﻨﺎﺴﺏ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻲ" ﺒﻴﻥ ﻫﺩﻑ‬
‫ﻭﻭﺴﻴﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻨﻲ… ﻭﻫﺫﺍ ﻤﻤﺎ ﻗﺩ ﻴﻀﺎﻋﻑ ﻤﻥ "ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺠﻴﺯ" ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻁﺭﺤﻬﺎ ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺔ… ﺃﻱ ﻤﻀﺎﻋﻔﺔ ﺼﻌﻭﺒﺎﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺒﺅ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺤﻜﻡ ﺒﻌﻨﺎﺼﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻨﻲ‪.‬‬
‫ﻼ‬
‫ﺃﻤﺎ ﺁﺜﺎﺭﻫﺎ ﻓﻤﻥ ﺤﻴﺙ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺩﺃ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﺴﻠﺒﻴﺔ ﻟﻤﺎ ﺘﺘﻀﻤﻨﻪ ﻤﻥ ﻓﺸل ﻓﻲ ﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ ﺃﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻅﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺘﻤﺩﺓ ﺃﺼ ﹰ‬
‫ﻭﻟﻤﺎ ﺘﺘﻀﻤﻨﻪ ﻤﻥ ﻫﺩﺭ ﻟﻺﻤﻜﺎﻨﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺎﺤﺔ ﻟﺫﻟﻙ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﻅﻴﻡ‪ ،‬ﻭﺒﺎﻟﻁﺒﻊ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺃﻥ ﺘﺄﺨﺫ ﻤﺜل ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻵﺜﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﺒﻴﺔ ﺼﻴﻎ‬
‫ﺘﻤﺱ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺎﻟﺢ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﺠﺘﻤﻊ ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﺇﺫﺍ ﻜﺎﻨﺕ ﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺔ ﻤﻭﺠﻭﺩﺓ ﻓﻲ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﻡ ﺍﻟﺤﻜﻭﻤﻴﺔ ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺼﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺭﺌﻴﺴﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺩﻭﻟﺔ… ﻭﻫﺫﺍ ﻤﺎ ﻴﻔﺴﺭ ﺍﻻﻫﺘﻤﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻤﻴﺯ ﻓﻲ ﺘﺸﺨﻴﺹ ﻭﺍﻨﺘﻘﺎﺀ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻷﻜﺜﺭ ﻓﺎﻋﻠﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺇﺩﺍﺭﺓ‬
‫ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺎﺕ‪.‬‬
‫ﺃﻤﺎ "ﺇﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺎﺕ" ﻓﻘﺩ ﺘﻌﺩﺩﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺎﺭﻴﻑ ﺒﺼﺩﺩﻫﺎ ﺃﻴﻀﹰﺎ… ﻭﻤﻥ ﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺎﺭﻴﻑ… ﺘﻌﺭﻴﻑ )ﺍﻟﺭﺍﺯﻡ‪،‬‬
‫‪ (1995‬ﺒﺄﻨﻬﺎ "ﻤﺤﺎﻭﻟﺔ ﻟﺘﺠﻨﺏ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺎﻁﺭ ﺍﻟﻜﺜﻴﺭﺓ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻔﺎﺠﺂﺕ ﻏﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺭﺓ ﻟﻜﻲ ﻴﺤﺎﻓﻅ ﺍﻹﻨﺴﺎﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻤﺘﻼﻙ ﺯﻤﺎﻡ‬
‫ﻻ ﻤﻥ ﺃﻥ ﺘﺘﻌﺜﺭ ﻭﺘﺘﻨﺎﺜﺭ ﻤﻥ ﺒﻴﻥ ﻴﺩﻴﻪ‪ ،‬ﻭﻋﺭﻓﻬﺎ )‪ (Mittroff, 1994‬ﺒﺄﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﻭﺩ ﺍﻟﻬﺎﺩﻓﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻷﻤﻭﺭ ﻭﺘﻭﺠﻴﻬﻬﺎ ﺒﺩ ﹰ‬
‫ﺇﻟﻰ ﺘﺼﻤﻴﻡ ﻭﺇﻋﺎﺩﺓ ﺘﺼﻤﻴﻡ ﻭﺘﻨﻔﻴﺫ ﺍﻟﺒﺭﺍﻤﺞ ﻭﺍﻟﺨﻁﻁ ﺍﻟﻼﺯﻤﺔ ﻻﻜﺘﺸﺎﻑ ﺇﺸﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻹﻨﺫﺍﺭ ﻭﺍﻻﺴﺘﻌﺩﺍﺩ ﻭﺍﻟﻭﻗﺎﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺍﺤﺘﻭﺍﺀ ﺍﻷﻀﺭﺍﺭ ﻭﺍﺴﺘﻌﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻨﺸﺎﻁ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻡ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﻗﻌﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﻋﺭﻑ )‪ (Milburn, 1983‬ﺇﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﺃﻴﻀ ﹰﺎ ﺒﺄﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺎﻤل ﺍﻟﻔﻌﺎل ﻟﻠﻘﻴﺎﺩﺓ ﻤﻊ ﺠﺎﻨﺒﻲ ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﻠﺒﻲ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻹﻴﺠﺎﺒﻲ ﻋﻥ ﻁﺭﻴﻕ ﺍﻟﻌﻤل ﻤﻥ ﺃﺠل ﺘﻘﻠﻴل ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺎﻁﺭ ﻭﺍﻟﺨﺴﺎﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺘﻤﻠﺔ ﻭﻋﻥ ﻁﺭﻴﻕ ﺍﻏﺘﻨﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻔﺭﺹ ﻟﺘﺤﻘﻴﻕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺭﺒﺤﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﻫﺫﺍ ﺒﺠﺎﻨﺏ ﺘﻌﺎﺭﻴﻑ ﺃﺨﺭﻯ ﻭﺭﺩﺕ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻷﺩﺒﻴﺎﺕ ﺒﻨﻔﺱ ﺍﻟﺼﺩﺩ )ﺍﻟﺸﻌﻼﻥ‪ .(1996 ،‬ﺃﻤﺎ ﻷﻏﺭﺍﺽ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺙ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﻲ ﻓﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺘﻌﺭﻴﻑ ﺇﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﺒﺄﻨﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﻭﺩ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺒﺫل ﻹﻋﺎﺩﺓ ﺤﺎﻻﺕ "ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺎﺴﺏ" ﺒﻴﻥ ﺃﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻭﻭﺴﺎﺌل‬

‫‪4‬‬
 ‫ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺯﻤﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻨﻲ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻤﺎ ﻜﺎﻨﺕ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺴﺎﺒﻘﹰﺎ ﺃﻭ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺤﺎﻻﺕ ﺘﻨﺎﺴﺏ ﺠﺩﻴﺩﺓ ﻓﻲ ﻅل‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻁﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺌﻴﺔ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﻜل ﺫﻟﻙ ﺨﺎﺭﺝ ﺍﻟﺴﻴﺎﻗﺎﺕ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺘﺎﺩﺓ ﺒﺎﻋﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺔ ﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﺘﻌﺠﻴﺯﻴﺔ ﻀﻤﻥ‬
‫ﻤﻌﻁﻴﺎﺕ ﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﺴﻴﺎﻗﺎﺕ‪.‬‬
‫ﺜﺎﻨﻴﹰﺎ‪ :‬ﺘﺤﻠﻴل ﻤﻀﺎﻤﻴﻥ "ﺍﻟﻌﻭﻟﻤﺔ"‪:‬‬
‫ﻋﺭﻓﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻭﻟﻤﺔ ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻤﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﺩﻴﺩ ﻤﻥ ﻭﺠﻬﺎﺕ ﻨﻅﺭ ﻤﺘﺒﺎﻴﻨﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓﻘﺩ ﺃﺸﺎﺭ ﺍﻟﺒﻌﺽ ‪(Naisbitt,‬‬
‫)‪ 1994; Fuhr, 2001‬ﺇﻟﻰ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻭل ﺒﺎﺘﺠﺎﻩ ﺍﻟﻌﻭﻟﻤﺔ ﻴﺅﺸﺭ ﺘﻀﺎﺅل ﺍﻟﻨﻅﻡ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﻜﻭﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻭﻁﻨﻴﺔ ﻤﻥ‬
‫ﻨﺎﺤﻴﺔ ﺃﺨﺭﻯ ﺃﺸﺎﺭ )‪ (Cox, 1993; Kelly, 2001‬ﺒﺄﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻭل ﻨﺤﻭ ﺍﻟﻌﻭﻟﻤﺔ ﻴﻌﻨﻲ ﺒﺭﻭﺯ ﺤﻜﻭﻤﺔ ﻋﺎﻟﻤﻴﺔ ﻟﺘﺤل‬
‫ﻤﺤل ﺍﻟﻨﻅﻡ ﺍﻟﺤﻜﻭﻤﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻭﻁﻨﻴﺔ… ﻭﻗﺩ ﺘﺒﻨﻲ ﻭﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺁﺨﺭﻭﻥ ﻤﺜل ‪(Emrich, 1991; Wilson,‬‬
‫)‪ .1994‬ﺒﺠﺎﻨﺏ ﻤﺎ ﺘﻘﺩﻡ ﺃﺸﺎﺭ )‪ (Markell, 2001‬ﺇﻟﻰ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻭل ﻨﺤﻭ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻤﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﺩﻴﺩ ﻴﻌﻨﻲ ﺒﺭﻭﺯ‬
‫ﻤﺭﻜﺯ ﻭﺤﻴﺩ ﻻﺘﺨﺎﺫ ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻡ ﻴﻌﻤل ﻤﻥ ﺨﻼل ﻤﺭﺍﻜﺯ ﺍﺘﺨﺎﺫ ﻗﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺇﻗﻠﻴﻤﻴﺔ‪ .‬ﻭﻫﻜﺫﺍ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺍﻟﻘﻭل ﺒﺄﻥ‬
‫"ﺍﻟﻌﻭﻟﻤﺔ" ﻫﻲ ﻤﺭﺤﻠﺔ ﺘﺤﻭل ﺍﻟﻨﻅﻡ ﺍﻟﻭﻁﻨﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺩﻭل ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻡ‪ ،‬ﺒﺠﻭﺍﻨﺒﻬﺎ ﺍﻻﻗﺘﺼﺎﺩﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻻﺠﺘﻤﺎﻋﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺴﻴﺎﺴﻴﺔ‪،‬‬
‫ﺇﻟﻰ ﻨﻅﻡ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻤﺘﻐﻴﺭﺍﺕ ﺃﻜﺜﺭ ﻋﺩﺩﹰﺍ ﻭﺘﻨﻭﻋﹰﺎ ﻭﺃﻜﺜﺭ ﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﻭﺃﻜﺜﺭ ﺍﺭﺘﺒﺎﻁﺎﺕ ﻓﻴﻤﺎ ﺒﻴﻨﻬﺎ… ﻭﺒﺎﻟﻁﺒﻊ ﻴﺘﻀﻤﻥ ﻫﺫﺍ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻭل ﺇﻟﻐﺎﺀ ﺃﻭ ﺘﻌﺩﻴل ﺍﻟﻜﺜﻴﺭ ﻤﻥ ﻤﺘﻐﻴﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﻡ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺌﻤﺔ ﻭﻜﺫﻟﻙ ﺇﺩﺨﺎل ﺘﻌﺩﻴﻼﺕ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻋﻼﻗﺎﺕ ﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﻡ ﺩﺍﺨﻠﻴﹰﺎ‬
‫ﻭﺨﺎﺭﺠﻴ ﹰﺎ ﻭﻫﺫﺍ ﻜﻠﻪ ﻴﻤﻜﻥ ﺃﻥ ﻴﺅﺩﻱ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺘﺤﻭل ﺍﻟﻌﺩﻴﺩ ﻤﻥ ﻋﻨﺎﺼﺭ ﻭﻋﻼﻗﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﻡ ﻫﺫﻩ ﻤﻥ ﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﺭﺘﺎﺒﺔ )ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻴﺔ( ﺇﻟﻰ ﺤﺎﻟﺔ ﺍﻟﻼﺭﺘﺎﺒﺔ )ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻼﺨﻁﻴﺔ( ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻐﻴﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺨﺘﺒﺭﻫﺎ ﻤﺭﺤﻠﻴ ﹰﺎ‪.‬‬
‫ﻭﺒﻤﺎ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﺔ ﺘﻠﻙ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺌﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻌﻤل ﻓﻲ ﻜﻨﻔﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﻡ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻭﻁﻨﻴﺔ ﻭﺘﺘﻔﺎﻋل ﻤﻌﻬﺎ‬
‫ﺘﺄﺜﻴﺭﹰﺍ ﻭﺘﺄﺜﻴﺭﹰﺍ… )‪ (Shafritz & Ott, 1992‬ﻓﺈﻥ ﻤﺎ ﻴﺠﺭﻱ ﻤﻥ ﺘﺤﻭل ﻓﻲ ﻋﻨﺎﺼﺭ ﻭﻋﻼﻗﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺭﺠﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺫﻜﻭﺭﺓ ﺴﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﻟﻪ ﺘﺄﺜﻴﺭﺍﺕ ﻤﻤﺎﺜﻠﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻋﻨﺎﺼﺭ ﻭﻋﻼﻗﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﻡ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻨﻴﺔ … ﺃﻱ ﺘﻅﻬﺭ ﺍﺤﺘﻤﺎﻻﺕ‬
‫ﺘﺤﻭل ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﻡ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﻤﻥ "ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻴﺔ" ﺇﻟﻰ "ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻼﺨﻁﻴﺔ" ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻐﻴﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺨﺘﺒﺭﻫﺎ ﺨﻼل‬
‫ﻤﺭﺤﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻭل ﻨﺤﻭ "ﺍﻟﻌﻭﻟﻤﺔ"…‬
‫ﻫﺫﺍ ﻭﺒﺤﻜﻡ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻭل ﺍﻟﻤﺭﺤﻠﻲ ﻟﺒﻌﺽ ﺍﻷﺠﻬﺯﺓ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻼﺨﻁﻴﺔ ﺘﺒﺭﺯ ﺍﺤﺘﻤﺎﻻﺕ ﻅﻬﻭﺭ‬
‫ﺤﺎﻻﺕ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻼﺘﻨﺎﺴﺏ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ‪ ،‬ﺃﻱ ﺃﺯﻤﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﻓﻲ ﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻷﺠﻬﺯﺓ ﺤﻴﺙ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺠﻴل ﺍﻟﺠﺩﻴﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﻤﻥ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻨﻭﻉ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﻴﺘﺴﻡ "ﺒﺎﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻼﺨﻁﻴﺔ" ﺒﺤﻜﻡ ﺍﻟﻁﺒﻴﻌﺔ ﺍﻟﻼﺨﻁﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﻐﻴﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺌﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺭﺤﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﻭﻟﻤﺔ…‬
‫ﺤﻴﺙ ﻴﻌﻨﻲ ﺫﻟﻙ ﺃﻥ ﺃﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﻓﺘﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﻭﻟﻤﺔ ﺘﺘﻤﻴﺯ ﺒﺼﻭﺭﺓ ﻋﺎﻤﺔ ﺒﺎﻥ ﻜل ﻤﻨﻬﺎ ﻴﻅﻬﺭ ﺒﺼﻴﻐﺔ ﺴﻠﺴﻠﺔ ﻤﺘﺘﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻤﻥ‬
‫ﺤﺎﻻﺕ ﺍﻟﻼﺘﻨﺎﺴﺏ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻲ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺃﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻭﻭﺴﺎﺌل ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺀﺍﺕ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﻬﺎﺯ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻨﻲ‪.‬‬
‫ﺜﺎﻟﺜ ﹰﺎ‪ :‬ﻤﻨﻬﺞ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻴﺔ ﻭﻤﻨﻬﺞ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻼﺨﻁﻴﺔ‪:‬‬
‫ﻁﺒﻘﹰﺎ ﻟﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ "ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻴﺔ" )‪ (Linear Dynamics‬ﺘﻌﺘﺒﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ "ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﻤﻐﻠﻕ" ﺒﻤﻌﻨﻰ ﺃﻨﻬﺎ ﺘﺅﺜﺭ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺒﻴﺌﺘﻬﺎ ﻭﻻ ﺘﺘﺄﺜﺭ ﺒﻬﺎ ﻤﻥ ﺤﻴﺙ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺩﺃ‪ .‬ﻓﺎﻟﻨﻅﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺭﻭﻗﺭﺍﻁﻴﺔ ﻟﻤﺎﻜﺱ ﻭﻴﺒﺭ )‪(Max Weber 1920-1864‬‬
‫ﻼ ﻤﺅﺴﺴﺘﺎﻥ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ "ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﻠﻤﻴﺔ ﻟﻔﺭﺩﺭﻴﻙ ﺘﻴﻠﺭ )‪ (Fredrick Taylor, 1920‬ﻤﺜ ﹰ‬
‫ﺤﻴﺙ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺘﺅﺜﺭ ﻭﻻ ﺘﺘﺄﺜﺭ ﺒﺒﻴﺌﺘﻬﺎ ﻜﻤﺎ ﺃﻥ ﺤﺭﻜﻴﺘﻬﺎ ﻤﺤﻜﻭﻤﺔ ﺒﻘﻭﺍﻋﺩ ﺭﺴﻤﻴﺔ ﺜﺎﺒﺘﺔ ﻭﺭﺘﻴﺒﺔ ﻭﺩﺍﺌﻤﺔ ﻻ ﻴﺴﻤﺢ‬
‫ﺒﺘﺠﺎﻭﺯﻫﺎ … ﻭﻫﺫﺍ ﻴﻌﻨﻲ ﺃﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻜﻡ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻨﺒﺅ ﺒﺴﻠﻭﻜﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﻋﺎﻟﻲ ﺠﺩﹰﺍ… ﺃﻤﺎ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺭﺠﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺤﻘﺏ ﺍﻟﺯﻤﻨﻴﺔ ﻟﻤﺎﻜﺱ ﻭﻴﺒﺭ ﻭﻓﺭﺩﺭﻴﻙ ﺘﻴﻠﺭ ﻓﻜﺎﻨﺕ ﺘﻐﻴﻴﺭﺍﺘﻬﺎ ﻤﺤﺩﻭﺩﺓ ﻭﺘﺘﺴﻡ ﺒﺎﻟﺭﺘﺎﺒﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻭﺍﺯﻥ ﻋﺎﻤﺔ‬
‫)‪ (Dynamic Equalibrum‬ﻭﺒﺎﻟﺘﺎﻟﻲ ﻓﺎﻟﺘﻐﻴﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻁﺒﻴﻌﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﺘﻁﻠﺒﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻨﻴﺔ ﻤﺤﺩﻭﺩﺓ ﻭﺭﺘﻴﺒﺔ‬
‫)‪ (Linear Dynamics‬ﻭﺴﻬﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻨﺒﺅ… ﺃﻤﺎ ﻤﺎ ﻋﺩﺍ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻨﺤﺭﺍﻓﺎﺕ ﻓﻲ ﺃﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﺃﻭ ﻭﺴﺎﺌل ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﺘﺨﺎﺫ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺩﺍﺨل ﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﻓﻴﻨﺒﻐﻲ ﺇﺯﺍﻟﺘﻬﺎ ﻭﺍﻟﻌﻭﺩﺓ ﺒﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﻡ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻤﺎ ﻜﺎﻨﺕ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ ﺍﺒﺘﺩﺍﺀﹰﺍ‪.‬‬

‫‪5‬‬
 ‫ﻭﻟﻜﻥ ﺒﻴﺌﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ ﻟﻡ ﺘﺒﻕ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﺼﺭ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻀﺭ ﻭﺭﺒﻤﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﺼﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺩﻤﺔ ﻜﻤﺎ ﻜﺎﻨﺕ‬
‫ﺴﺎﺒﻘ ﹰﺎ… ﻓﻘﺩ ﺘﻀﺎﻋﻔﺕ ﻭﺘﻨﻭﻋﺕ ﻤﺘﻐﻴﺭﺍﺘﻬﺎ ﻭﺍﺘﺠﻬﺕ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﺯﻴﺩ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﺸﺎﺒﻙ ﻭﺍﻟﻼﺭﺘﺎﺒﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺤﺭﻜﻴﺎﺘﻬﺎ ﻏﻴﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺘﻭﺍﺯﻨﺔ )‪ (Dynamic Non- Equalibrum‬ﻭﻫﺫﺍ ﻤﻤﺎ ﺠﻌل ﺍﻟﻜﺜﻴﺭ ﻤﻥ ﺠﻭﺍﻨﺏ ﻋﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﺌﻤﺔ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺭﺴﻤﻲ ﻟﻠﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺠﻬﺔ ﻭﻤﺘﻁﻠﺒﺎﺕ ﺒﻴﺌﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺠﺩﺩﺓ ﻤﻥ ﺠﻬﺔ ﺃﺨﺭﻯ ﺨﺎﺭﺝ ﻤﻘﺩﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻹﻨﺴﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺩﻭﺩﺓ‬
‫…)‪ (Bounded Rationality‬ﻭﻫﺫﺍ ﻤﻤﺎ ﻴﻤﻬﺩ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺤﺼﻭل ﺤﺎﻻﺕ ﺘﻌﺠﻴﺯﻴﺔ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﻼﺘﻨﺎﺴﺏ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻲ ﻭﺒﻴﻥ‬
‫ﺃﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻭﻭﺴﺎﺌل ﻗﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻨﻴﺔ )ﺃﺯﻤﺎﺕ( ﻓﻲ ﺴﻴﺎﻕ ﺠﻬﻭﺩﻫﺎ ﻟﻀﻤﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﻘﺎﺀ ﻭﺍﻻﺴﺘﻤﺭﺍﺭ ﻓﻲ ﺒﻴﺌﺘﻬﺎ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺠﺩﺩﺓ‪ … .‬ﻓﺎﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻫﻨﺎ ﺃﺼﺒﺤﺕ ﻭﺒﺤﻜﻡ ﺍﻟﻀﺭﻭﺭﺓ "ﻨﻅﺎﻤﹰﺎ ﻤﻔﺘﻭﺤﹰﺎ" ﻴﺅﺜﺭ ﻭﻴﺘﺄﺜﺭ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﻴﻁﺔ‪ ،‬ﻜﻤﺎ‬
‫ﺘﻁﻠﺏ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻗﻑ ﺃﻥ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﺘﻐﻴﻴﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﺭﻴﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺃﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻭﻭﺴﺎﺌل ﺍﻟﻘﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ ﻟﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻤﻨﺤﻨﻰ ﻻ ﺨﻁﻲ‬
‫)‪ (Priesmery, 1992) (Non- Linear Dynamics‬ﺍﺴﺘﺠﺎﺒﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﻐﻴﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺌﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻤﺎﺜﻠﺔ ﻭﺒﺎﻟﺘﺎﻟﻲ ﻅﻬﺭﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺤﺎﺠﺔ ﻟﻤﻨﻬﺞ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻼﺨﻁﻴﺔ )‪ (Non- Linear Approach‬ﻟﻠﺘﻨﺒﺅ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺤﻜﻡ ﺒﻌﻼﻗﺎﺕ ﻭﻋﻨﺎﺼﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﺼﺭﺓ )‪.(Kiel, 1993; Chorafas, 1994; Overman, 1996‬‬
‫ﻭﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻭﻗﺕ ﺍﻟﺫﻱ ﺘﻌﺎﻅﻤﺕ ﻓﻴﻪ ﻤﺤﺩﻭﺩﻴﺔ ﻓﺎﻋﻠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻬﺞ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻠﻴﺩﻱ "ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻴﺔ" ‪(Linear‬‬
‫)‪ Approach‬ﻟﺫﻟﻙ ﺍﻟﻐﺭﺽ )‪ (Sell now, 2002‬ﻓﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﺌﻤﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻨﺎﺴﺏ ﺒﻴﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﻭﺒﻴﺌﺘﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻭﺒﺎﻟﺘﺎﻟﻲ‬
‫ﺒﻴﻥ ﺃﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻭﻭﺴﺎﺌل ﻗﺭﺍﺭﺍﺘﻬﺎ‪ ،‬ﻻ ﺘﺘﻡ ﻀﻤﻥ ﺃﻁﺭ ﻭﻗﻭﺍﻋﺩ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﺭﺴﻤﻲ ﻓﻘﻁ ﺒل ﻴﺘﻡ ﺠﺎﻨﺒﹰﺎ ﻤﻨﻬﺎ ﺒﺼﻭﺭﺓ ﺫﺍﺘﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻏﻴﺭ ﺭﺴﻤﻴﺔ ﻭﻏﻴﺭ ﺭﺘﻴﺒﺔ ﻭﻏﻴﺭ ﻤﺨﻁﻁﺔ ﺩﺍﺨل ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ )‪ (Homeostaist‬ﻀﻤﺎﻨﹰﺎ ﻟﺒﻘﺎﺌﻬﺎ ﻭﺍﺴﺘﻤﺭﺍﺭﻫﺎ ﻓﻲ‬
‫ﺒﻴﺌﺎﺘﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﺘﺠﺩﺩﺓ‪ .‬ﻭﻫﺫﺍ ﻴﻌﻨﻲ ﺃﻥ ﺒﻌﺽ ﺤﺎﻻﺕ ﺍﻟﻼﺘﻨﺎﺴﺏ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺠﻴﺯﻱ )ﺃﺯﻤﺎﺕ( ﺒﻴﻥ ﺃﻫﺩﺍﻑ ﻭﻭﺴﺎﺌل ﻗﺭﺍﺭﺍﺕ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﻨﻴﺔ ﻗﺩ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﻓﻲ ﺠﻭﻫﺭﻫﺎ ﺇﻓﺭﺍﺯﺍﺕ ﻟﻌﻤﻠﻴﺎﺕ ﺘﻁﺒﻴﻊ ﺫﺍﺘﻲ )‪ (Shafrits, Ott, 1992‬ﻟﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺔ‬
‫ﻤﻊ ﻤﺘﻐﻴﺭﺍﺕ ﻤﻌﻴﻨﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻌﻤل ﻓﻲ ﻜﻨﻔﻬﺎ )‪ (Kial, 1993‬ﻜﺎﻟﺒﻴﺌﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﻌﺎﺼﺭ ﺤﻴﺙ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻭل ﺇﻟﻰ ﺍﻟﻌﻭﻟﻤﺔ‬
‫ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻤﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﺩﻴﺩ‪.‬‬

‫ﺘﺤﻠﻴل ﻤﻨﺎﻫﺞ ﺇﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﻓﻲ ﺇﻁﺎﺭ "ﻤﻨﻬﺞ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻴﺔ" ﻭ "ﻤﻨﻬﺞ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻼﺨﻁﻴﺔ"‪:‬‬
‫ﺘﺸﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴﻼﺕ ﺃﻋﻼﻩ ﺇﻟﻰ ﻀﺭﻭﺭﺓ ﻤﻀﺎﻋﻔﺔ ﺘﻭﻅﻴﻑ "ﻤﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻼﺨﻁﻴﺔ" ﻓﻲ ﻤﻘﺎﺒﻠﺔ "ﻤﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻴﺔ" ﻓﻲ ﺇﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺃﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﻤﺭﺤﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻭل ﺇﻟﻰ ﻤﺎ ﻴﻌﺭﻑ ﺒﺎﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻤﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﺩﻴﺩ ﺃﻭ ﺍﻟﻌﻭﻟﻤﺔ… ﻭﺭﻏﺒﺔ‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺘﻠﻤﺱ ﻤﺩﻯ ﺍﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﺘﻭﺠﻪ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﻭﺙ ﺍﻟﻤﻴﺩﺍﻨﻴﺔ ﺫﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﺒﺈﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﺘﻡ ﺘﻔﺤﺹ ﻋﻴﻨﺔ ﻋﺸﻭﺍﺌﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺒﺤﺠﻡ )‪ (75‬ﻤﻤﺎ ﻤﺘﺎﺡ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺒﺤﻭﺙ ﻭﺍﻟﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺸﻭﺭﺓ ﻓﻲ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﺎل ﺨﻼل ﺍﻟﺤﻘﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﺯﻤﻨﻴﺔ )‪(2004-2000‬‬
‫ﺤﻴﺙ ﺼﻨﻔﺕ ﻫﺫﻩ ﺍﻷﺩﺒﻴﺎﺕ ﻤﻥ ﺤﻴﺙ ﻤﻴﻠﻬﺎ ﻻﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ "ﻤﻨﻬﺞ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻴﺔ" ﺃﻭ ﻤﻴﻠﻬﺎ ﻨﺤﻭ ﺍﻋﺘﻤﺎﺩ "ﻤﻨﻬﺞ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻼﺨﻁﻴﺔ" ﺇﻀﺎﻓﺔ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺘﺼﻨﻴﻔﻬﺎ ﻤﻥ ﺤﻴﺙ ﻤﻴﻠﻬﺎ ﻨﺤﻭ "ﺍﻟﻭﻗﺎﺌﻴﺔ" ﺃﻭ ﻨﺤﻭ "ﺍﻟﻌﻼﺠﻴﺔ" ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺎﻤل ﻤﻊ ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﻭﻜﻤﺎ‬
‫ﻤﻭﻀﺢ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﺩﻭل ﺍﻟﺘﺎﻟﻲ‪:‬‬
‫ﺠﺩﻭل ﺭﻗﻡ )‪(1‬‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻴﻭل ﻨﺤﻭ "ﻤﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻴﺔ" ﺃﻭ "ﻤﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻼﺨﻁﻴﺔ" ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻴﻭل ﻨﺤﻭ "ﺍﻟﻭﻗﺎﺌﻴﺔ" ﺃﻭ "ﺍﻟﻌﻼﺠﻴﺔ" ﻓﻲ‬
‫)*(‬
‫ﺍﻟﺒﺤﻭﺙ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺸﻭﺭﺓ )‪(2004-2000‬‬

‫ﺍﻨﻅﺭ ﺍﻟﻤﻠﺤﻕ ﺭﻗﻡ )‪ (1‬ﺍﻟﺒﺤﻭﺙ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺸﻭﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﺘﻡ ﺘﺤﻠﻴل ﻤﻨﺎﻫﺠﻬﺎ‪.‬‬ ‫)*(‬

‫‪6‬‬
‫ﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺨﻁﻴﺔ‪/‬‬ ‫ﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﻻ‬ ‫ﻋﻼﺠﻲ‪ /‬ﻭﻗﺎﺌﻲ ﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺨﻁﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﻋﻼﺠﻲ‬ ‫ﻭﻗﺎﺌﻲ‬ ‫ﺴﻨﺔ‬
‫ﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﻻ‬
‫ﺨﻁﻴﺔ‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻨﺸﺭ‬
‫ﺨﻁﻴﺔ‬

‫‪%‬‬ ‫ﻋﺩﺩ‬ ‫‪%‬‬ ‫ﻋﺩﺩ‬ ‫‪%‬‬ ‫ﻋﺩﺩ‬ ‫‪%‬‬ ‫ﻋﺩﺩ‬ ‫‪%‬‬ ‫ﻋﺩﺩ‬ ‫‪%‬‬ ‫ﻋﺩﺩ‬

‫‪6.6‬‬ ‫‪5‬‬ ‫‪9.3‬‬ ‫‪7‬‬ ‫‪6.6‬‬ ‫‪5‬‬ ‫‪2.6‬‬ ‫‪2‬‬ ‫‪4‬‬ ‫‪3‬‬ ‫‪16‬‬ ‫‪12‬‬ ‫‪2004‬‬

‫‪8‬‬ ‫‪6‬‬ ‫‪8.6‬‬ ‫‪4‬‬ ‫‪2.6‬‬ ‫‪2‬‬ ‫‪12‬‬ ‫‪9‬‬ ‫‪6.6‬‬ ‫‪5‬‬ ‫‪10.6‬‬ ‫‪8‬‬ ‫‪2003‬‬

‫‪5.3‬‬ ‫‪4‬‬ ‫‪4‬‬ ‫‪3‬‬ ‫‪8‬‬ ‫‪6‬‬ ‫‪12‬‬ ‫‪9‬‬ ‫‪0‬‬ ‫‪0‬‬ ‫‪5.3‬‬ ‫‪4‬‬ ‫‪2002‬‬

‫‪5.3‬‬ ‫‪4‬‬ ‫‪2.6‬‬ ‫‪2‬‬ ‫‪0‬‬ ‫‪0‬‬ ‫‪5.3‬‬ ‫‪4‬‬ ‫‪2.6‬‬ ‫‪2‬‬ ‫‪0‬‬ ‫‪0‬‬ ‫‪2001‬‬

‫‪5.3‬‬ ‫‪4‬‬ ‫‪5.2‬‬ ‫‪4‬‬ ‫‪12‬‬ ‫‪9‬‬ ‫‪12‬‬ ‫‪9‬‬ ‫‪6.6‬‬ ‫‪5‬‬ ‫‪4‬‬ ‫‪3‬‬ ‫‪2000‬‬

‫‪30.‬‬ ‫‪23‬‬ ‫‪40‬‬ ‫‪30‬‬ ‫‪29.‬‬ ‫‪22‬‬ ‫‪44‬‬ ‫‪33‬‬ ‫‪20‬‬ ‫‪15‬‬ ‫‪36‬‬ ‫‪27‬‬ ‫ﺇﺠﻤﺎﻟﻲ‬

‫‪6‬‬ ‫‪3‬‬ ‫ﺍﻟﻔﺘﺭﺓ‬

‫ﻴﻅﻬﺭ ﻤﻥ ﺍﻟﺠﺩﻭل ﺃﻋﻼﻩ ﺘﻔﻭﻕ ﺍﻟﻤﻴل ﺍﻟﻭﻗﺎﺌﻲ‪ /‬ﺍﻟﻌﻼﺠﻲ )‪ (%44‬ﻭﻤﻥ ﺜﻡ ﺍﻟﻭﻗﺎﺌﻲ )‪ (%36‬ﻭﺒﻌﺩ ﺫﻟﻙ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻌﻼﺠﻲ )‪ .(%20‬ﻭﺒﺎﻟﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﺍﻟﺘﻔﺼﻴﻠﻲ ﻴﻼﺤﻅ ﺘﻨﺎﻤﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻴل ﺍﻟﻭﻗﺎﺌﻲ ﺤﻴﺙ ﻜﺎﻥ )‪ (%4‬ﻋﺎﻡ )‪ (2000‬ﻭﺃﺼﺒﺢ‬
‫)‪ (%16‬ﻋﺎﻡ )‪ .(2004‬ﺃﻤﺎ ﺍﻟﻌﻼﺠﻲ ﻓﻘﺩ ﺘﻨﺎﻗﺹ ﻤﻥ )‪ (%6.6‬ﻋﺎﻡ )‪ (2000‬ﺇﻟﻰ )‪ (%4‬ﻋﺎﻡ )‪ .(2004‬ﺒﺠﺎﻨﺏ‬
‫ﺫﻟﻙ ﺘﻨﺎﻗﺹ ﺍﻟﻤﻴل ﺍﻟﻌﻼﺠﻲ‪ /‬ﺍﻟﻭﻗﺎﺌﻲ ﻤﻥ )‪ (%12‬ﻋﺎﻡ )‪ (2000‬ﺇﻟﻰ )‪ (%2.6‬ﻋﺎﻡ )‪ (2004‬ﻜﺫﻟﻙ ﻴﺸﻴﺭ ﺍﻟﺠﺩﻭل‬
‫ﺭﻗﻡ )‪ (1‬ﺃﻋﻼﻩ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺘﻔﻭﻕ ﺍﻟﻤﻴل ﻨﺤﻭ "ﻤﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻼﺨﻁﻴﺔ" )‪ (%40‬ﺨﻼل ﺍﻟﻔﺘﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺴﻤﻭﺤﺔ ﻭﻴﺄﺕ ﺒﻌﺩﻩ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻤﻴل ﻨﺤﻭ "ﻤﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻼﺨﻁﻴﺔ" ﻭ "ﻤﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻼﺨﻁﻴﺔ" ﺒﻨﻔﺱ ﺍﻟﻭﻗﺕ )‪ (%30.6‬ﻭﻤﻥ ﺜﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻴل‬
‫ﻼ ﻭﺃﻓﻀﻠﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻀﺤﺔ ﻭﺨﻼل ﻓﺘﺭﺓ ﺯﻤﻨﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻨﺤﻭ "ﻤﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻴﺔ" )‪ …(%29.3‬ﺤﻴﺙ ﻴﺅﺸﺭ ﺫﻟﻙ ﻤﻴ ﹰ‬
‫ﻗﺼﻴﺭﺓ ﻨﺴﺒﻴ ﹰﺎ )ﺨﻤﺴﺔ ﺴﻨﻭﺍﺕ( ﻟﺼﺎﻟﺢ "ﻤﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻼﺨﻁﻴﺔ" ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺎﻤل ﻤﻊ ﺃﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﻓﺘﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻭل ﻨﺤﻭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻤﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﺩﻴﺩ… ﺃﻤﺎ ﺇﺫﺍ ﺃﻀﻴﻔﺕ ﺃﺭﻗﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻤﻴل ﻨﺤﻭ "ﻤﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻴﺔ ﻭﻤﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻼﺨﻁﻴﺔ"‬
‫ﻓﺎﻷﻓﻀﻠﻴﺔ ﺒﺎﺘﺠﺎﻩ "ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻼﺨﻁﻴﺔ" ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﺃﻋﻠﻰ ﻭﺒﺎﻟﺘﺎﻟﻲ ﻴﻜﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﺴﺅﺍل ﺍﻟﺒﺤﺜﻲ ﻗﺩ ﺃﺠﻴﺏ ﻋﻠﻴﻪ… ﻜﻤﺎ‬
‫ﺃﻥ ﻫﺫﺍ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﻨﺘﺎﺝ ﻴﺅﻴﺩ ﻤﺎ ﺫﻫﺒﺕ ﺇﻟﻴﻪ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻠﻴﻼﺕ ﻭﻨﺘﺎﺌﺠﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺼﻔﺤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺒﻘﺔ‪.‬‬
‫ﺒﺠﺎﻨﺏ ﻤﺎ ﺘﻘﺩﻡ ﺘﺸﻴﺭ ﺘﻐﻴﻴﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﻨﺴﺏ ﺍﻟﻤﺌﻭﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﻤﻴﻭل ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﺨﻼل ﺍﻟﻔﺘﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﻭﺜﺔ‪ ،‬ﺭﻏﻡ ﺍﻗﺘﺼﺎﺭﻫﺎ‬
‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﺨﻤﺴﺔ ﺴﻨﻭﺍﺕ ﻤﻥ ﻤﺭﺤﻠﺔ ﻤﺎ ﻴﻌﺭﻑ ﺒﺎﻟﺘﺤﻭل ﻨﺤﻭ ﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻡ ﺍﻟﺠﺩﻴﺩ‪ ،‬ﺇﻟﻰ ﺘﻨﺎﻤﻲ ﻭﺘﺯﺍﻴﺩ ﺍﻟﺘﺄﻜﻴﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻴل‬
‫ﻨﺤﻭ "ﻤﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻼﺨﻁﻴﺔ" ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺎﻤل ﻤﻊ ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﺨﺘﻠﻔﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻡ‪ .‬ﻓﻔﻲ ﻋﺎﻡ )‪ (2000‬ﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻴل ﻨﺤﻭ‬
‫"ﻤﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻼﺨﻁﻴﺔ" )‪ (%5.2‬ﻓﻲ ﺤﻴﻥ ﺃﺼﺒﺢ )‪ (%9.3‬ﻋﺎﻡ )‪ (2004‬ﻭﻜﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻤﻴل ﻨﺤﻭ ﺍﻟﺠﻤﻊ ﺒﻴﻥ‬
‫"ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻴﺔ" ﻭ "ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻼﺨﻁﻴﺔ" )‪ (%5.3‬ﻋﺎﻡ )‪ (2000‬ﻭﺃﺼﺒﺢ )‪ (%6.6‬ﻋﺎﻡ‬
‫)‪.(2004‬‬
‫ﺃﻤﺎ ﺍﻟﻤﻴل ﻨﺤﻭ "ﻤﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺨﻁﻴﺔ" ﻓﻜﺎﻥ‪ ،‬ﺨﻼل ﻨﻔﺱ ﺍﻟﻔﺘﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﺒﺤﻭﺜﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺘﻨﺎﻗﺹ ﻋﻜﺱ ﺍﻟﺤﺎﻟﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺴﺎﺒﻘﺔ… ﺤﻴﺙ ﻜﺎﻥ )‪ (%12‬ﻋﺎﻡ )‪ (2000‬ﻭﺃﺼﺒﺢ )‪ (%6.6‬ﻋﺎﻡ )‪.(2004‬‬
‫ﻤﻌﻨﻰ ﻤﺎ ﺘﻘﺩﻡ ﺃﻥ ﺴﻨﻭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﺤﻭل ﺍﻟﺘﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﺒﺎﺘﺠﺎﻩ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺎﻡ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻤﻲ ﺍﻟﺠﺩﻴﺩ ﻴﻐﻠﺏ ﺃﻥ ﻴﺼﺎﺤﺒﻬﺎ ﺍﺴﺘﻤﺭﺍﺭ‬
‫ﻭﺘﻨﺎﻤﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻴل ﻨﺤﻭ "ﻤﻨﻬﺠﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺤﺭﻜﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻼﺨﻁﻴﺔ" ﺇﻀﺎﻓﺔ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺘﻨﺎﻤﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺄﻜﻴﺩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﻤﻴل "ﺍﻟﻭﻗﺎﺌﻲ" ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺎﻤل ﻤﻊ‬

‫‪7‬‬
 ‫ﺠﻴل ﺃﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻼﺨﻁﻴﺔ ﻟﻌﺼﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﻭﻟﻤﺔ… ﻭﻗﺩ ﻴﺘﻁﻠﺏ ﺫﻟﻙ ﺇﻋﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭ ﻓﻲ ﻤﻨﺎﻫﺞ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﻠﻴﻡ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺏ ﺍﻟﺠﺎﻤﻌﻲ‬
‫ﻹﻋﺩﺍﺩ ﻗﻴﺎﺩﺍﺕ ﺃﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﺘﻤﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﺘﻘﻨﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻻﺴﺘﺜﻨﺎﺌﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﻼﺯﻤﺔ‪ ،‬ﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﻤﺎ ﻴﺘﻌﻠﻕ ﻤﻨﻬﺎ ﺒﺎﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﻗﻔﻴﺔ‬
‫)‪ ،(Contengency Management) (Huczynski & Buchanan, 2001‬ﻜﻤﺎ ﺘﻤﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﻭﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻴﺔ‬
‫ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺤﻤل ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﻌﺎﻤل ﻤﻊ ﺘﻘﻠﺒﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻭﺍﻗﻑ ﻭﺘﻨﻭﻋﻬﺎ‪ .‬ﻫﺫﺍ ﺇﻀﺎﻓﺔ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺇﻋﺎﺩﺓ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﺭ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﺘﺼﺎﻤﻴﻡ ﺍﻟﻨﻅﻤﻴﺔ‬
‫ﺍﻟﻘﺎﺌﻤﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻤﺨﺘﻠﻑ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ‪ ،‬ﺨﺎﺼﺔ ﺘﻠﻙ ﺍﻟﺘﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺘﻤﺎﺱ ﻤﺒﺎﺸﺭ ﻤﻊ ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﻭﺘﺤﻭﻴﻠﻬﺎ ﻤﻥ ﺘﺼﺎﻤﻴﻡ ﻨﻅﻤﻴﺔ ﺁﻟﻴﺔ‬
‫)‪ (Mechanistic Organization Design‬ﺤﻴﺙ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﻭﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﻤﺤﺩﻭﺩﺓ ﺇﻟﻰ ﺘﺼﺎﻤﻴﻡ ﻨﻅﻤﻴﺔ ﻋﻀﻭﻴﺔ ‪(Organic‬‬
‫)‪ Organization Design‬ﺤﻴﺙ ﺍﻟﻤﺭﻭﻨﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻟﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﻘﺩﺭﺓ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻟﺘﻁﺒﻊ ﻤﻊ ﺍﻟﺘﻐﻴﻴﺭﺍﺕ ﺍﻟﺒﻴﺌﻴﺔ ﺍﻟﺴﺭﻴﻌﺔ ﻭﻏﻴﺭ‬
‫ﺍﻟﺭﺘﻴﺒﺔ )‪.(Huczynski & Buchanan, 2001‬‬

‫‪8‬‬
 ‫ﺍﻟﻤﺭﺍﺠﻊ ﻭﺍﻟﻤﺼﺎﺩﺭ‬

:‫ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺎﺩﺭ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻴﺔ‬:‫ﻻ‬
‫ﺃﻭ ﹰ‬

‫ "ﻨﻅﺭﻴﺔ ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺔ ﻭﺇﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺎﺕ" ﻓﻲ ﺍﺴﺘﺭﺍﺘﻴﺠﻴﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻐﻴﻴﺭ ﻭﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ‬،‫ ﻤﺩﺤﺕ‬،‫ﺃﺒﻭ ﺍﻟﻨﺼﺭ‬ -

‫ ﻤﺭﻜﺯ ﻭﺃﻴﺩ ﺴﻴﺭﻓﺱ ﻟﻼﺴﺘﺸﺎﺭﺍﺕ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻁﻭﻴﺭ‬،(‫ ﺴﻌﻴﺩ ﻴﺱ ﻋﺎﻡ )ﻤﺤﻘﻕ‬،‫ﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻷﻋﻤﺎل ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻴﺔ‬

.268 ‫ ﺹ‬،1993 ،‫ ﺍﻟﻘﺎﻫﺭﺓ‬،‫ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﻱ‬

،‫ﻡ‬1989 ،4‫ ﻉ‬،5 ‫ ﻤﺞ‬،"‫ ﺃﺒﺤﺎﺙ ﺍﻟﻴﺭﻤﻭﻙ‬،"‫ "ﺇﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﻅﻤﺎﺕ‬،‫ ﺃﻤﻴﻤﺔ‬،‫ﺍﻟﺩﻫﺎﻥ‬ -

.71 ‫ﺹ‬

،‫ ﺍﻟﻁﺒﻌﺔ ﺍﻷﻭﻟﻰ‬،"‫ "ﺍﻟﺘﺨﻁﻴﻁ ﻟﻠﻁﻭﺍﺭﺉ ﻭﺇﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﻓﻲ ﺍﻟﻤﺅﺴﺴﺎﺕ‬،‫ ﻋﺯ ﺍﻟﺩﻴﻥ‬،‫ﺍﻟﺭﺍﺯﻡ‬ -

.11 ‫ ﺹ‬،1995 ،‫ ﺩﺍﺭ ﺍﻟﺨﻭﺍﺠﺎ ﻟﻠﻨﺸﺭ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﻭﺯﻴﻊ‬:‫ﻋﻤﺎﻥ‬

،(65) ‫ ﺍﻟﻌﺩﺩ‬،(29) ‫ ﺍﻟﺴﻨﺔ‬،‫ ﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺍﻹﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻤﺔ‬،"‫ "ﺇﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﻜﻭﺍﺭﺙ‬،‫ ﺤﺴﻥ ﺃﺒﺸﺭ‬،‫ﺍﻟﻁﻴﺏ‬ -

.55 ‫ ﺹ‬،1990 ‫ﻴﻨﺎﻴﺭ‬

‫ ﺍﻟﻤﺠﻠﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺭﺒﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﺩﺭﺍﺴﺎﺕ‬،"‫ ﻤﻨﻅﻭﺭ ﺇﺩﺍﺭﻱ‬:‫ "ﻤﻭﺍﺠﻬﺔ ﺍﻷﺯﻤﺎﺕ ﺍﻷﻤﻨﻴﺔ‬،‫ ﻓﻬﺩ ﺃﺤﻤﺩ‬،‫ﺍﻟﺸﻌﻼﻥ‬ -

.158-157 ‫ ﺹ ﺹ‬،‫ﻡ‬1996 ،11 ‫ ﻉ‬،11 ‫ ﻤﺞ‬،‫ﺍﻷﻤﻨﻴﺔ ﻭﺍﻟﺘﺩﺭﻴﺏ‬

:‫ ﺍﻟﻤﺼﺎﺩﺭ ﺍﻷﺠﻨﺒﻴﺔ‬:‫ﺜﺎﻨﻴﹰﺎ‬
- Bucha, Alaster, “Crisis Management”, The Atlantic Paper”, France, Atlantic
Institute, 1996.
- Bieber, Robert M., “Clutch Management in a Crisis” Risk Management, Vol.
36, No. 4, April, 1988.
- Chorafas, Dimitris N., Chaos Theory in the Financial Markets, Probns,
Chieago, 1994.
- Cox, R. W. “Structural Issues of Global Governance” (in). S. Gill (ed.),
Gramici, Historical Materials and International Relations, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, 1993.
- Emrich, Anne Bond, “Globalization Poses Both Opportunities and Threats”,
Grand Rapids Business Journal, Vol. 18, Issue 8, 200.
- Ford, Jeffery D., “The Management of Organizational Crisis”, Business
Horizons, Vol. 24, No. 3, May/ June. 1981.
- Fuhr, Harald, “Constructive Pressures and Incentives to Reform: Globalization
and its Impact on Public Sector, Performance and Governance in Developing
Countries”, Public Management Review, Vol. 3, Issue 3, Sept. 2001.

9
- Gladwin T., and Kumar R., “The Social Psychology of Crisis Bargaining:
Toward A Contingency Model”, Columbia Journal of World Business Vol. 22,
No. 1, Spring 1987.
- Huczynski, Andrzej & Buchanan, David, Organizational Behavior: An
Introductory Text, FT Prentice Hall, England, 2001.
- Kelly, James P. “Globalization is not Inevitable”, World Trade, Vol. 14, Isue
7, July 2001.
- Kiel, L. Douglas, “Non- Linear Dynamical Analysis: Assessing Systems
Concepts in a Government Agency”, Public Administration Review, Vol, 53,
March/ April 1993.
- Markell, David L “Thinking Globally and Acting Locally: Reflections About
the Possible Impacts of Globalization in the Evolution of Seqa, Albany Law
Review, Vol. 65, Issue 1, 2001.
- Milburn, T, Schuler, R. and Watman, K., “Organizational Crisis Part I:
Definition and Conceptualization”, Human Relations, Vol, 36, No. 12, 1983.
- Mitroff, Ian I. “Crisis Management and Environmentalism: A Natural Fit”,
California Management Review, No, 2, Winter 1994.
- Naisbitt, John, The Global Paradox: the Bigger the World Economy the More
Powerful Its Smallest Players, Brealy, London, 1994.
- Overman, E. Sam, “The New Science of Administration: Chaos and Quantum
Theory”, Public Administration review, Vol. 56, Sept./ Oct. 1996.
- Phelps, Norman L., “Setting Up a Crisis Recovery Plan”, J. of Business
Strategy, Vol. 6, No. 4, 1986.
- Priesmeyer, H. Richard, Organizations and Chaos: Defining the Methods of
Non- Linear Management, Quorurn Book, West Port, 1992, (Preface).
- Sellnow, Timothy L. et. al., “Chaos Theory, Information of Needs, and
Natural di. et. af. Disasters”, Journal of Applied Communication Research,
Nov. 2002, Vol. 30, Issue 4.
- Shafritz, Jay M. and J. Steven Ott (eds.) Classics of Organization Theory,
Pacific Grove, California, Books/ Cole Pub Co. 1992.
- Shrivastava, Paul & Mitroff, Ian I., Strategic Management of Corporate
Crises”, Columbia Journal of World Business, Vol. 22, No. 1, Spring 1987.
- Simon, Herbert A. “Decision Making: Rational, Nonrational, Irrational”.
Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 29, No. 3, Aug. 1993.
- Simon, Herbert A., Administrative Behavior, New York, The Free Press,
1957. (Preface).
- Wilson, David, “Bureaucracy in International Organizations: Bnilding Capcity
and Credibility in a Newly Independent World” (in) Al Farazmand (ed.),
Handbook of Bureaucracy, Marcel Dekker, NY. 1994.

10