INHERENT CHAOS IN THE ORGANIZATIONAL ORDER: AN EPISTEMOLOGICAL APPROACH (original) (raw)
Related papers
Organisational leadership and chaos theory: Let's be careful
Journal of Educational Administration, 2004
This article addresses issues associated with applications of ideas from “chaos theory” to educational administration and leadership as found in the literature. Implications are considered in relation to claims concerning the behaviour of non-linear dynamic systems, and to the nature of the interpretations and recommendations that are made. To aid the analysis a simple non-linear model is constructed and its behaviour simulated. Questions emerging from the analysis are used to focus on issues deemed significant, both for evaluating arguments presented on behalf of chaos, and for furthering insights aimed at enhancing the understanding and practice of leadership in organisations.
Chaos and Complexity Approach in Management
Advances in Religious and Cultural Studies, 2016
In business management literature, chaos and complexity approaches came into sight in 1990's. Fundamental changes have been made by chaos and complexity approaches in understanding of scientific methodology. In social sciences, especially in management and organization fields these notions should be seen as supplementary to the general systems theory. Chaotic management approach also revealed dramatic changes in management understanding chaotic management perspective has brought up the consideration of human both in organisational and humane perspective, which has only been considered within organisational perspective. In other words, placing human in the centre as the essential element of living humanely again has been provided. In this study effects of chaotic theory starting from basic mathematical and scientific findings, were investigated on production, economy, service and social sciences. Also we worked on influence of the theory on management and organization area.
The Practical Application of Chaos Theory for Management of the Organizational Environment
“Where chaos begins,” writes James Gleick in his influential 1987 book on the subject, “classic science ends” (p. 3). This is because chaos theory turns the mechanistic, causal order of much of Newtonian scientific understanding on its head. It is a bold statement, and one that has significant implications not simply for the natural sciences, but for the social sciences as well – including management. Gleick offers up several definitions of the concept, but one that hints at both the promise and potentially terrifying nature of the theory is: “systems liberated to randomly explore their every dynamical possibility… a cornucopia of opportunity” (p. 306). A significant challenge then becomes whether and how to translate the insights from developments in physics into improved outcomes in the workplace. The purpose of this paper is thus to answer the research question (RQ): What practical lessons can managers take from the application of Chaos Theory to the organizational environment?
Chaos Theory as a Component of Weak Leadership Within the Organizational Environment
This paper is a rapid evidence assessment of five published articles that report on chaos theory in the organizational environment historically, as well as two published case studies of the theory within the past five years, to determine how insights from the theory might inform a weak leadership framework. Operationalizing chaos theory as leaders involves a willingness to set aside notions of a mechanistic, cause and effect world for an understanding of the organizational environment that better reflects the fluid and dynamic nature of reality. The paper identifies six key themes from the literature: adaptability, operating on the edge of chaos, nonhierarchy, nonlinearity, open and iterative communication, and uncertainty. These six themes are shown to align with the basic premises of a weak leadership framework. This larger framework emerges out of the tradition of weak theology, where weakness is understood as a positive attribute. Its basic premises include: community building, consensus-based decision-making, dispersed knowledge, noncoercion, nonhierarchy, and nonomniscience. Chaos theory as a component of weak leadership within the organizational environment allows for the development of a model of the chaordic organizational state – one that remains in motion as it moves to temporary states of order rather than falling prey to either complete chaos or total stagnation. Practitioners and researchers are encouraged to test this model in operation in a variety of settings to examine its ongoing effectiveness in response to change and crisis. Keywords: chaos theory, leadership, organizational environment, rapid evidence assessment, weak theology
It is better to understand the natural laws that govern society than to create man made laws that will not work. You have to ask yourself, what kind of an organization do you want. Do you want an organization that requires a powerful and ruthless leader or do you want an organization where everyone genuinely cares about one another? If a system is sufficiently complex, all we can do is, tweak the parameters, run it in real time, and watch what happens. How do natural systems find balance? They have no choice, it is either balance or oblivion. All natural laws retain the balance contained within the scope of that law, no man made law can do this. In societies where natural laws are in operation, lawyers are rare but in societies where these laws have been subverted, you will see an escalation of litigation. Having an overwhelming sense of entitlement is not a virtue. When we speak of natural law, we are speaking of a high and lofty thing. Few men have the capacity to truly understand these laws. They dabble at power and control and dig for themselves and others a pit from which no man can escape and in the end the law returns and covers them over. As a process passes through a system, a hierarchy emerges. The form of variation is scale dependent. Society as a whole can be thought of as a system. Because value creation is such a subjective thing our metric must be the system itself. This is the idea of "the ends justify the means" but there is a caveat, we have a feedback loop which causes the means to feedback in a manner that is very difficult to predict. The principles involved can be stated as; extreme sensitivity to initial conditions, criticality at the edge of chaos, resolution and scale, nested hierarchies and unpredictable results. Your influence on the system depends on what you are connected to, along with the systems influence on you. Your values branch out into the network of associations and connect to possibilities. The more good values at the individual levels, the better the chance of finding a fitness peak. Things like trust, dignity, love, charity, empathy and reciprocity matter. In summery; what we value matters, we become what we are connected to. The greater good says "the ends justify the means" the common good says "the means are all important." Liberty is inherently opposed to government, there is a dynamic tension that must maintain balance.
LEADERSHIP AND LEADERSHIP QUALITIES IN CHAOS MANAGEMENT
YÖNETİM – STRATEJİ – ORGANİZASYON: Teoride ve Uygulamada , 2021
There are very important, fundamental factors that enable organizations to succeed. Being able to manage-that is, to manage well- is one of them. Perhaps many people think that finance and production factors are more necessary and important for a successful organization or for an organization to be successful. But many organizations may not be successful despite having strong financial resources. What makes an organization successful is the better management of all business functions. Managing is human work. Here, the importance of the concept of leadership comes into play. Things naturally get complicated when the thing being managed is human. Understanding human nature and managing them is quite challenging, even under normal conditions. Scientists working in the field of organizational behavior are still introducing new concepts and investigating people's behavior in working life. Even when all conditions are stable, understanding human behavior in the organization and determining a leadership style according to these behavior types is tiring and complex. Let us also imagine that the business line of the organization operates in a constantly changing and complex environment, or a chaotic situation that occurs at a time that the whole world does not expect, such as a pandemic. The most basic question asked in chaos management is “can chaos be managed?” This study will examine the relationship between chaos theory and organizations, and the relationship between management and chaos. It aims to answer the question: “What kind of leadership should be applied in a chaotic environment, what should be the characteristics of the leader?” In the study firstly, the basics of chaos theory, the relationship between social sciences and chaos theory, will be explained. Then, the relationship between management science and leadership theories and chaos theory will be examined, and finally opinions on how leadership and leader characteristics should be in chaos management will be discussed.
Journal of Business Administration and Research, 2020
Organizations in the 21 st century deal with constant changes such as globalization, technological evolutions, regulatory changes, competition, and other unexpected events, among others. These challenges can be viewed and addressed through the lenses of contemporary theories. This paper selected three contemporary theories namely chaos, complexity, and contingency theories, and presented their foundations and characteristics by comparing and contrasting their key concepts. These concepts include nonlinearity, feedback, bifurcation, strange attractors, fractals, and self-organization for chaos theory; nonlinearity, dynamism, feedback, self-organization, emergence, and adaptability for complexity theory; and adaptation, equifinality, effectiveness, and congruency for contingency theory. Examples of studies and organizational applications of these theories were provided, and implications for scholars and organizational leaders were discussed. By explaining notions such as how the capacity of a system could be greater than the sum of the capacities of its subunits, this paper can act as a starting point for anyone seeking to understand the three theories or use them for research or organizational purposes.