All design persecutes intentions no necessarily shared by all the members of the organization? The intentions that orient a design modify in the same course of their resolution and implementation. Even in the case of clear, stable and common intentions, all design is put under a series of tension that is necessary to solve. Recently Seth Fischer sought to clarify these questions. The resolution of these tensions does not only depend on the objectives that guide the design, but also of a series of context variables, between which they can distinguish the type of organization, the situation in which it is and the degree of gobernalidad that it presents/displays (understood like the relation between controlable and noncontrolable variables of the situation (Matus, 1987), the characteristics of the members and their level of commitment and involvement. The resolution of these tensions is dynamic: It changes with the modification of the objectives and the variables of context. There is no ideal design nor there is design that does not undergo modifications, and even degradation, in the process of his implementation. There is no design that it leaves according to the involved ones, even though exists among them a community of intentions in relation to the design. There will always be particular interests affected by the design. The singularity of the design consists of trying to conciliate the particular interests in game.
To try the linguists say, is an expression of anticipated defeat: But although he knows that thus he is, the designer of organizations in organizations cannot stop trying this conciliation, because she is not about objects but interventions that involve the people. All previously exposed, she mentions Schvarstein, they on the one hand, destroy of the design a movable target, and on the other, a product that always will be questioned. Of there exactly, the challenging edges that appear for their resolution. Considrese, that the design activity is explicitly ligature to the architecture and the graphical design and of products. In relation to the organization it has been oriented traditionally to the design of structures and processes, understanding by so the determination of the forms that adopt the relations between rolls and of the flows that transform entrances into exits. It remembers in addition, that the structural approaches have been restricted generally to the organization by products, functions or markets, the hierarchies based on a unique logic (pyramidal) or dual (Matrix), the connection in networks, the relation between functions of line and staff, between functions in direct bonding with the clients and compatible functions of support and other questions. Recently, the design activity has become more explicit in relation to the sociodinmicos aspects of the organization, in whom she had generally been boarded of implicit form.
Of this form, there are including questions regarding the systems and processes of human resources (selection, induction, qualification, development and promotion of the people), to the political systems (relations of being able and authority, resolution of conflicts and disputes, coalitions), to symbolic systems (culture, myths, rites of initiation and passage, histories and narratives). The certain thing, that considerable attention has been put, says Schvarstein to us, in the design of the processes of change in the organization, aspect that cannot neglect. *Docente of postgraduate, Program of specialty in management of the quality and productivity, University of Carabobo. Engineer, Exatec Modern managemental Topical Annotations of the chair, the program Management of the quality and productivity, Area of postgraduate of Phases, University of Carabobo.