Premium
So what's new about complexity?
Author(s) -
Murray Peter J.
Publication year - 2003
Publication title -
systems research and behavioral science
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.371
H-Index - 45
eISSN - 1099-1743
pISSN - 1092-7026
DOI - 10.1002/sres.562
Subject(s) - value (mathematics) , reductionism , phrase , theme (computing) , computer science , complexity theory and organizations , complexity science , management science , epistemology , sociology , artificial intelligence , knowledge management , economics , organizational learning , philosophy , machine learning , operating system
This paper addresses the extent to which the insights of what is called the New Sciences (Catastrophe, Chaos and Complexity Theory) for organizational life are novel, and to what extent they do not take managers much further forward than other theories which have questioned a classical or reductionist view of management. The link to the conference theme is provided by a new model which sets out to define four levels of complexity (sic), dependent on the system exclusivity (degree of complexity) and endurance (degree of change). The past ten years have seen a growth of interest in the insights which ‘management complexity’ claims to provide for modern management. This author has felt uncomfortable that many of these insights are in fact little different from insights of previous writers, and that the lack of evidence for their applicability in natural science systems, let alone organizational situations, means that they have little proven value beyond (in some cases powerful) metaphors. The paper takes a number of the characteristics of complex systems (the phrase will include catastrophic and chaotic systems), and the insights which are claimed for management complexity, and will relate these to other (non‐complexity) writings, in some cases going back over decades. It uses a case study relating to the author's own experience in teaching on MBA programmes to demonstrate the value of complexity ideas, but will evaluate these against alternative insights, again demonstrating the relationships between complexity and change. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.