Complexity theory and organizations

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(Redirected from Complexity and organization)
Jump to: navigation, search

Complexity theory has been used extensively in the field of strategic management and organizational studies, sometimes called 'complexity strategy' or 'complex adaptive organization' on the internet or in popular press.

Contents

Broadly speaking, complexity theory is used in these domains to understand how organizations or firms adapt to their environments. The theory treats organizations and firms as collections of strategies and structures. When the organization or firm shares the properties of other complex adaptive systems - which is often defined as consisting of a small number of relatively simple and partially connected structures -- they are more likely to adapt to their environment and, thus, survive. Complexity theoretic thinking has been present in strategy and organizational studies since their inception as academic disciplines.

For instance, early strategy and organizational theorists emphasized complexity-like thinking including:

  • Herbert Simon's interest in decomposable systems and computational complexity.
  • Karl Weick's loose coupling theory and interest in causal dependencies
  • Burns and Stalker's contrast between organic and mechanistic structures
  • Charles Perrow's interest in the link between complex organization and catastrophic accidents
  • James March's contrast between exploration and exploitation

More recently work by organizational scholars and their colleagues have added greatly to our understanding of how concepts from the complexity sciences can be used to understand strategy and organizations. The work of Dan Levinthal, Jan Rivkin, Nicolaj Siggelkow, Kathleen Eisenhardt, Nelson Repenning, Phil Anderson and their research groups have been influential in their use of ideas from the complexity sciences in the fields of strategic management and organizational studies.

  • Axelrod, R. A., & Cohen, M. D., 2000. Harnessing Complexity: Organizational Implications of a Scientific Frontier. New York: The Free Press [1].
  • Bar-Yam, Y. 2005. Making Things Work: Solving Complex Problems in a Complex World. Cambridge, MA: Knowledge Press [2]
  • Brown, S. L., & Eisenhardt, K. M. 1997. The Art of Continuous Change: Linking Complexity Theory and Time-paced Evolution in Relentlessly Shifting Organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42: 1-34 [3].
  • Burns, S., & Stalker, G. M. 1961. The Management of Innovation. London: Tavistock Publications [4].
  • Davis, J. P., Eisenhardt, K. M., & Bingham, C. B. 2007. Complexity Theory, Market Dynamism, and the Strategy of Simple Rules, Stanford Technology Ventures Program working paper [5].
  • Gell-Mann, M. 1994. The Quark and the Jaguar: Adventures in the Simple and the Complex. New York: WH Freeman [6].
  • Kauffman, S. 1993. The Origins of Order. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. [7].
  • Kurtz, C & Snowden, D (2003) “The New Dynamics of Strategy: sense making in a complex-complicated world” in IBM Systems Journal” Volume 42 Number 3 pp 462-483
  • Levinthal, D. 1997. Adaptation on Rugged Landscapes. Management Science, 43: 934-950 [8].
  • March, J. G. 1991. Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning. Organization Science, 2(1): 71-87 [9].
  • McKelvey, B. 1999. Avoiding Complexity Catastrophe in Coevolutionary Pockets: Strategies for Rugged Landscapes. Organization Science, 10(3): 249-321 [10].
  • Moffat, James. 2003. Complexity Theory and Network Centric Warfare. [11]
  • Perrow, C. Complex Organizations: A Critical Essay Scott, Forseman & Co., Glenville, Illinois [12].
  • Rivkin, J., W. 2000. Imitation of Complex Strategies. Management Science, 46(6): 824-844 [13].
  • Rivkin, J. and Siggelkow, N. 2003. Balancing Search and Stability: Interdependencies Among Elements of Organizational Design. Management Science, 49, pp. 290-311 [14].
  • Rudolph, J., & Repenning, N. 2002. Disaster Dynamics: Understanding the Role of Quantity in Organizational Collapse. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47: 1-30 [15].
  • Schilling, M. A. 2000. Toward a General Modular Systems Theory and its Applicability to Interfirm Product Modularity. Academy of Management Review, 25(2): 312-334 [16].
  • Siggelkow, S. 2002. Evolution toward Fit. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47, pp. 125-159 [17].
  • Simon, H. 1996 (1969; 1981) The Sciences of the Artificial (3rd Edition) MIT Press [18].
  • Smith, Edward. 2006. Complexity, Networking, and Effects Based Approaches to Operations] by Edward[[19]
  • Weick, K. E. 1976. Educational Organizations as loosely coupled systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21(1): 1-19 [20].

The following include a variety of places where complexity science is done in the areas of strategy and organizational studies:

Advanced Search
Included Web Search Engines


Safe Search

close

Top Matching Results

Occasionally Search.com will highlight specialized results that are based on the context of your query. Examples of specialized results include specific links to news, images, or video.

Top Matching Results may highlight information from other Search.com pages, content from the CNET Network of sites, or third party content. The listings are based purely on relevance. Search.com does not receive payment for listings in this section but our partners that provide this data may get paid for listing these products.

Sponsored Links

This section contains paid listings which have been purchased by companies that want to have their sites appear for specific search terms and related content. These listings are administered, sorted and maintained by a third party and are not endorsed by Search.com.

Search Results

Search.com sends your search query to several search engines at one time and integrates the results into one list which has been sorted by relevance using Search.com's proprietary algorithm. You can customize the list of search engines included in your metasearch from the preferences.

The search engines that are used in your metasearch may allow companies to pay to have their Web sites included within the results. To view the Paid Inclusion policy for a specific search engine, please visit their Web site. Search.com does not accept payment or share revenue with any search engine partner for listings in this section.