Content area
Full text
The application of complexity science to business. Professor Richard Wilding
Introduction
While complexity theory has made significant progress it still remains an elusive perspective when it comes to "articulating sharp formulations" ([56] Moldoveanu and Bauer, 2004, p. 98). [2] Brodbeck (2002a) noted that the practical application of complexity theory is less obvious than the theory itself. Similarly, [53] McKelvey (1999) counseled that operationalization problems have surfaced, which have been exacerbated by the troublesome nature of empirical testing ([16] Cohen, 1999). [62] Ortegon-Monroy (2003) and [82] Smith and Humphries (2004) concluded that complexity theory is difficult to translate into practice. On the other hand, [52] McElroy (2000, p. 195) described complexity theory as a "confident solution in search of unorthodox problems" providing "an explanation for the means by which living systems engage in adaptive learning". Although complexity might be better considered as an unorthodox solution to a range of confident problems associated with curtailed innovation in a bureaucratic system, McElroy's appreciation of its explanatory value in complex systems is salient. The limitation with complexity theory, however, is that its explanatory value is more apparent than its prescriptive implementation; a by-product of its very nature, that of non-linear systemic interaction.
Ostensibly, the acceptance of complexity requires the acceptance of ambiguity. For example, one of the central concepts in complexity is emergence, but the mechanics of this self-organization demand that it occur one level removed from management intervention. As a result, the translation of complexity theory into management action is troublesome. As [18] da Cunha et al. (2001) observed, although complexity, chaos and disorganization have been proposed as a new approach to management, few managers have actually done it (intentionally). They concluded that complex environments call for both planning and creativity; forces that have often been seen as contradictory. One key problem therefore lies in reconciling the "shape" or organizing form that complexity theory takes in an organization.
[57] Murray (2003) observed that some descriptions of complexity can reveal positivistic assumptions where objective rules guide the system and determine the success criteria. In these narratives of complex adaptive systems, agents are empowered to prescribe the details of what will be produced emergently by the system. Numerous authors have addressed the limitations of positivistic views of complexity ([12] Cilliers,...