The Science of Complexity and Organizational Learning: Emergence of a Model for the Analysis of Organizational Competitiveness (original) (raw)
Related papers
The rapid and constant changes in the environment influence individuals and organizations. Under these pressures, organizations need continually to learn how to cope with fierce competition at both global and local level, which represents constant challenges to organizations and those working in them. In this context, the question is: How can organizational practices impact the innovation process to enable organizations to compete more effectively? In order to answer this question, our general objective is to study the organizational practices in the face of innovation concepts aimed at organizational competitiveness (1) to raise the conceptual meanings of innovation that contribute to the organization's competitiveness; (2) to characterize organizational practices in an institutional locus; and to make a confrontation between the meanings of innovation and practices (3). The theoretical basis chosen for this essay lies in Complexity Theory, considering the antagonistic concepts and, at the same time, complementary to the perspective proposed here. The research has a qualitative approach and was elaborated through the method of Content Analysis, aiming to analyze the core of innovation by focusing on organizational practices, observing the dynamic relationship between the organization’s many interdependent levels, assuming that this serves as a lens for understanding the phenomenon under review, how organizational practices can interfere in the process of innovation in organizations intended to improve organizational competitiveness.
Theoretical approaches to managing complexity in organizations: A comparative analysis
This paper aims to identify the differences and similarities in the way to explain self-organization from the different theories of complex systems used in management, which we have grouped as complex systems theories, complex adaptive systems (CAS) and organizational cybernetics. For this purpose we suggest three parallel and complementary dimensions to delimit the conceptual spaces where these theories can be placed. Using this classification as an analytical lens we summarize the core arguments suggested by each of these complex systems approaches, regarding the ideas of emergence and new order. This analysis helps us to conclude that the three theories coincide in their interest for studying nonlinear complex systems, but diverge in the nature of the complex problems studied. Finally we analyze the consequences that recognizing the similarities and differences between these approaches have, when using them for the study and research of social and business organizations and their management.
SOCIAL COMPLEX EVOLVING SYSTEMS: IMPLICATIONS FOR ORGANIZATIONAL LEARNING
2000
This paper argues that some of the principles of Complexity Science may be very useful in our efforts to explore and more fully account for the evolving social complexity that constitutes learning practices in organizations. We review the main principles of complex adaptive systems, steeped in the new science of complexity, and we apply these principles to our analysis of the main dimensions that have been employed so far in studying Organizational Learning (OL). Our analysis provides a new way of conceptualising OL as a complex evolving social system emphasising self-organization, emergence and co-evolution as central dimensions. We compare this new perspective, the complex view of OL, to the two main dominant perspectives of Organizational Learning: the individual and the social view.
Integrating complexity theory, knowledge management and organizational learning
Journal of Knowledge Management, 2000
Chronicles the unfolding convergence of thinking and practice behind knowledge management, organizational learning and complexity theory. Of particular interest are the roles that knowledge management and complexity theory play in this impending consilience of ideas. On the one hand, knowledge management is anxious to rid itself of its overly technology-centric reputation in favor of promoting the role it can play in furthering organizational learning. On the other, complexity theory, a confident solution in search of unorthodox problems, has discovered its own true place in the world, an explanation for the means by which living systems engage in adaptive learning ± the seminal source of social cognition in living systems.
Applying the science of complexity to the question of organization
Applying the science of complexity to the question of organization, 2014
In this master thesis, the question is explored of how complexity theory can inform and challenge the study of organizations. Complexity theory researches complex social and natural systems and the phenomena to which they give rise, such as emergence, adaptiveness, self-organization and complexity. It has been suggested that (human) organizations are complex systems, being composed of many actors which, through local interactions, generate emergent behavior on the level of the organization as a whole. If this is true, it challenges many of the – implicit - assumptions we hold when thinking and writing about organizations. Drawing on complexity scholars and organization theorists such as Ralph Stacey, Paul Cilliers, and Edgar Morin, I analyze and critically evaluate (1) How complexity theory has been used in organizations studies so far (2) What theoretical and ethical consequences the insights from complexity theory hold for the way we think about organizations (3) What a theory of organization rooted in complexity studies could look like (4) How professionals working with organizations can develop an attitude that allows them to better deal with complexity in their practice. I conclude that complexity theory has important consequences for the way we think and work in organizations, proposing an approach which is not aimed at reducing complexity for those involved, but at engaging it from an attitude which is both modest and reflective. My thesis was awarded with the Leo Polak Thesis Prize 2014 (second prize).
Managing complex organizations: Complexity thinking and the science and art of management
Emergence: Complexity & Organization, 2008
This article is an attempt to explore the implications of the emerging science of complexity for the management of organizations. It is not intended as an introduction to complexity thinking, but rather an attempt to consider how thinking ‘complexly’ might affect the way in which managers do their jobs. This is achieved in a rather abstract way with some theory, but I hope the general message that there is no one way to manage comes through loud and clear, and that management is as much an art as it is a science. In a sense complexity thinking is about limits, limits to what we can know about our organizations. And if there are limits to what we can know, then there are limits to what we can achieve in a pre-determined, planned way.
Organizational Change with the System and Complexity Theories in Mind
The ability to successfully manage both internal and external generated changes has become a major source of competitive advantage for business organizations. This study tries to explore the system and complexity theory in line with organization change. The paper reviews organizational change through system theory, various critiques of system theory, complexity theory, dynamics of complex system, characteristics of complex system, and the implication of system and complexity theory for organization using relevant literatures. A good understanding of the two paradigms would become useful in addressing complex organizational dilemmas that may result as the organization tries achieving its goal and objective in a dynamic internal and external environment.