 |
| 
Springs
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 636
| Posted 1/19/2002 5:16 PM (GMT -6) |   | Here’s my first humongous cut and paste. (With omissions) Chaos theory works in business too. 
Lichtenstein, B.B. (2001).Self-organized transitions: A pattern amid the chaos of transformative change. The academy of Mangement Exectuive, v14p128. Retrievced Januray 9, 2001 from Inforac: http://web5.infotrac.galegroup.com/
This article offers one solution to this problem, based on the integration of
two sources of insight about transformative change. The first source is a set
of metaphors from nonlinear dynamic systems theories that helps explain the
dynamics of new and small organizations undergoing major change. Some
researchers argue that complex system theories, which are gaining relevancy in
the field of management, more accurately describe the "dynamism and complexity
of real organizations creating and adapting to change." [6] In their study of
adaptation and transformation, complex systems theorists have identified a
consistent pattern underlying change, even amidst chaotic systems. This
pattern is called self-organization, and it can be described as a three-stage
process of transformative change
This pattern views transformation as a system-wide process that is dynamic and
nonlinear--a complex adaptive systems model of change.
The three-stage process of complex adaptive systems change
According to traditional models of small business development, organizations
grow incrementally, moving through specific, predetermined stages in their
life cycle. [10] Lifes-cycle models, like most theories of development, assume
that development and growth are synonymous. Organizational complexity,
according to these models, should increase incrementally and consistently as
companies grow.
However, in the case of ServiceCo--and in more than 40 percent of reported
cases of small business development--fundamental transitions are neither
linear nor incremental, and may not generate growth. [11] The transition at
ServiceCo was a nonlinear shift--a rapid transformative change from one
configuration to another. Far from being incremental, change erupted when the
company crossed a critical threshold--a limitation on its ability to grow
within its organizing framework. At that point, the twin perils of turbulence
and chaos triggered the emergence of a new configuration, including a
reconceived mission and renewed activity domains throughout the company,
consisting of a new organizational design, new strategy, new leadership roles,
and new controls.
Most importantly, the new activity domains were self-organized--generated out
of the core values and expertise that were most essential in the company.
These qualities fit the pattern of complex adaptive systems change.
Complexity theories assert that companies continuously regenerate themselves
through adaptive learning and interactive structural change. These efforts
periodically result in the spontaneous emergence of a whole new dynamic order,
through a process called self-organization. A model of self-organization can
be generated by comparing the ServiceCo case to the study of phase transitions
in other natural systems. [12] These natural transitions, through the lens of
complexity science, suggest a simple process that can be applied to the
management of specific change events.
Stage 2: Tension and a threshold of change
In most circumstances, the configuration will continuously adapt to small
changes in resource flows. Major transformations of the system, however, will
be resisted. [16] A resistance to change was expressed by ServiceCo's
cofounder, who was president of the PeopleServe project. When he initially
confronted his partner about the negative test results, the partner's response
was, "Yeah, we're one-sixth of projections, but we can do it!" The PeopleServe
project manager concurred:
There's a can-do spirit here, the feeling that we can create miracles, saying,
"This is a problem, but we'll figure out a way to solve it--we just have to
put enough creative energy into it."
Although fundamental changes in a configuration are rare, when an increase or
decrease of activity or resources is large enough to push the organization to
its limits--when the system is so overloaded or underperforming that it can't
achieve its goals, becoming less and less able to function smoothly--a process
of transformation will begin.
According to complexity researchers, once a system moves beyond certain
limits, stress and tension increase and the system becomes highly nonlinear.
As a result, specific behaviors in the organization may become amplified
instead of suppressed. [17] In formal terms, below a certain limit, tension
and new ideas are dampened, making change unlikely. Above a certain threshold,
however, even small shifts or interventions can become amplified, making
change imminent. In effect, system-wide change is usually preceded by an
increase in intensity, tension, and a critical recognition of some sort
A primary requirement of positive self-organizing is that the
newly emergent dynamic order be based on principles, values, and elements that
are intrinsic, or self-referenced, to the system, rather than being imposed
without reference to the history and learning in the organization. The more
the new dynamic order is congruent with the origins and evolving expertise of
the firm, the more successful the change will be. In more formal terms, the
more self-referenced the changes to the deep structure of the company--its
essential qualities, accumulated learning, and core competencies, the more
likely the transformation will lead to survival and success.
A third quality that generates self-organizing requires a delicate balance
between structured organization and informal organizing at the edge of chaos.
Complexity scholars have found that self-organization is optimized at high
levels of interdependence, involving enough connectedness to allow new and
fresh innovations, while at the same time maintaining clear boundaries and
structures that keep the system from being overwhelmed with too many options.
]In summary, complex adaptive systems change focuses on the
level of activity and resources that can be generated and used by the firm. If
and when the organizing activities in the company expand or drop beyond those
limits, stress and tension will increase, driving the system into a nonlinear
state. At that point, small actions can become amplified to a peak of tension
where one particular event will initiate a system-wide reorganization. This
transformation will be self-organized if the emergent activity structures are
self-referenced, if they increase the system's capacity, and if they generate
interdependent organizing. Finally, the higher the degree of
self-organization, the higher the likelihood of survival, and of positive
performance in the midterm.
A pattern amid the chaos
Predictability is one of the hallmarks of management science, and classical
management theory is based on the ability to predict and control behavior in
organizational systems. However, one of the primary implications of complexity
research is the collapse of predictability in dynamic systems, whose
nonlinearity makes it impossible to forecast specific outcomes of change.
Most of the writing on chaos and complexity focuses on creating a
self-organizing culture, developing adaptive strategies, or moving to the edge
of chaos in a sustainable way. [29] My research differs in that it focuses on
self-organizing as a process of change in small and new companies, rather than
a general managerial approach focused on large organizations. The insights
from these three cases, in concert with the growing interest in applying
complex systems ideas to organizations, may help managers generate
self-organizing changes during critical transitions, to support the viability
and vitality of their companies throughout the development journey.
Acknowledgment
Editor's Note: This article was submitted to the call for papers on the 1999
Academy of Management conference theme, change and development journeys in a
pluralistic world. The author and the editor are grateful to Professor Hugh
O'Neill, guest editor of the call for papers, for his guidance and
suggestions.
Benyamin Bergmann Lichtenstein is an assistant professor of entrepreneurship
and management, and director of the Entrepreneurial Studies program at the
University of Hartford. His research is on extending self-organization and
complex adaptive systems change to entrepreneurial start-ups, project
organizing, organizational team learning and knowledge creation, and careers.
Contact Benyamin @mail.hartford.edu.
Who among you actually read this?
Springs
"God has instituted prayer so as to confer upon his creatures the dignity of being causes." — Blaise Pascal
Edited by - Springs on 01/21/2002 10:46:43 PM | | Back to Top | | |
 | Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 3:12 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|