Skip to main content
Log in

A Complex Adaptive Systems Model of Organization Change

  • Published:
Nonlinear Dynamics, Psychology, and Life Sciences

Abstract

The study of complex adaptive systems has yielded great insight into how complex, organic-like structures can evolve order and purpose over time. Business organizations, typified by semi-autonomous organizational members interacting at many levels of cognition and action, can be portrayed by the generic constructs and driving mechanisms of complex adaptive systems theory. The purpose of this paper is to forge a unified description of complex adaptive systems from several sources, and then investigate the issue of change in a business organization via the framework of complex adaptive systems. The theory of complex adaptive systems uses components from three paradigms of management thought: systems theory, population ecology, and information processing. Specific propositions regarding the nature of dynamical change will be developed, driven by the complex adaptive systems model. Supporting evidence for these propositions is then sought within the existing management theory literature. In doing so, the complex adaptive systems approach to understanding organization change will be better grounded in domain-specific theory, and new insights and research areas will come to light.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Abraham, F., Abraham, R., & Shaw, C. (1990). A visual introduction to dynamical systems theory for psychology. Santa Cruz, CA: Aerial Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ackoff, R. L. (1988). The second industrial revolution (speech transcript).

  • Ackoff, R. K., & Emery, F. E. (1972). On purposeful systems. Chicago: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, P., & Sanglier, M. (1981). Urban evolution, self-organization, and decision-making. Environment and Planning A, 13, 167–183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J., Rungtusanatham, M., & Schroeder, R. (1994). A theory of quality management underlying the Deming management method. Academy of Management Review, 19, 472–509.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, P., & Tushman, M. L. (1990). Technological discontinuities and dominant designs: A cyclical model of technological change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 604–633.

    Google Scholar 

  • Argyris, C., & Schon, D. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arthur, W. B. (1994). On the evolution of complexity. In G. A. Cowen, D. Pines, & D. Meltzer (Eds.), Complexity: Metaphors, models, and reality. SFI Studies in the Sciences of Complexity, Proc. (Vol. XIX, pp. 65–82). New York: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashby, W. R. (1958). An introduction to cybernetics. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baum, J., & Singh, J. (1994). Evolutionary dynamics of organizations. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beaumariage, T., & Kempf, K. (November 1994). The Nature and Origin of Chaos in Manufacturing. IEEE Advanced Semiconductor Manufacturing Conference, Boston.

  • Bohm, D. (1957). Causality and chance in modern physics. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, R., & Richerson, P. (1985). Culture and the evolutionary process. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke, W., & Litwin, G. (1992). A causal model of organization performance and change. Journal of Management, 18, 523–545.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burns, T., & Stalker, G. M. (1961). The management of innovation. London: Tavistock.

    Google Scholar 

  • Camp, R. C. (1989). Benchmarking. Milwaukee, WI: Quality Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Capra, F. (1982). The turning point. Toronto: Bantam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cartwright, T. J. (1991). Planning and chaos theory. Journal of American Planning Association, 57, 44–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cavalli-Sforza, L., & Feldman, M. (1981). Cultural transmission and evolution: A quantitative approach. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chase, C., Serrano, J., & Ramadge, P. (1993). Periodicity and chaos from switched flow systems: Contrasting examples of discretely controlled continuous systems. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 38, 70–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, Y-T., & Van de Ven, A. (1994). Learning the innovation journey: Order out of chaos? Technical Report, Strategic Management Center, University of Minnesota.

  • Csanyi, V. (1989). Evolutionary systems and society: A general theory. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cyert, R. M., & March, J. G. (1963). A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies, S. (1979). The diffusion of process innovation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawkins, R. (1976). The selfish gene. New York: Oxford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Bono, E. (1969). The mechanism of mind. New York: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deshmukh, A. (1993). Complexity and Chaos in Manufacturing Systems. Doctoral dissertation, School of Industrial Engineering, Purdue University.

  • DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, G., & Lorsch, J. (1980). Decision making at the top. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dooley, K. (in press). Chaotic dynamics and autonomous agents in manufacturing. Chaos Network.

  • Dooley, K., Bush, D., Anderson, J., & Rungtusanatham, M. (1990). The U.S. Baldrige award and Japan's Deming prize: Two guidelines for total quality control. Engineering Management Journal, 2(3), 9–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dooley, K., Johnson, T., & Bush, D. (1995). TQM, chaos, and complexity. Human Systems Management, 14, 297–302.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dutton, J., & Dukerich, J. (1991). Keeping an eye on the mirror: Image and identity in organizational adaptation. Academy of Management Journal, 34, 517–554.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eoyang, G. (October 1993). Patterns: an algorithm for complex interactions. Paper presented to the Annual Conference of the Chaos Network, Minneapolis.

  • Eoyang, G., & Dooley, K. (1996). Boardrooms of the future: The fractal nature of organizations. In C. Pickover (Ed.), Fractals in the future (pp. 195–203). New York: St. Martin's Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erramilli, A., & Forys, L. (1991). Oscillations and chaos in a flow model of a switching system. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 9, 171–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiol, M., & Huff, A. (1992). Maps for managers: where are we? Where do we go from here? Journal of Management Studies, 29, 267–285.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiol, M., & Lyles, M. (1985). Organization learning. Academy of Management Review, 10, 803–813.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forrester, J. W. (1961). Industrial dynamics. Cambridge, MA: Productivity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gailbraith, J. R. (1974). Organization design: An information processing view. Interfaces, 4, 28–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garvin, D. A. (1991). How the Baldrige award really works. Harvard Business Review, November–December, 80–93.

  • Gell-Mann, M. (1994). The quark and the jaguar. New York: Freeman & Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • George, C. (1968). The history of management thought. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gersick, C. (1988). Time and transition in work teams: Toward a new model of group development. Academy of Management Journal, 31(1), 9–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gioia, D., & Chittipeddi, K. (1991). Sensemaking and sensegiving in strategic management initiation. Strategic Management Journal, 12, 433–448.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gleick, J. (1987). Chaos: Making of a new science. New York: Viking.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein, J. (1990). A nonequilibrium, nonlinear approach to organizational change. In D. Andersen, G. Richardson, & J. Sterman (Eds.), System dynamics '90 (pp. 425–439). Cambridge, MA: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein, J. (1994). The unshackled organization. Portland, OR: Productivity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould, S. J. (1989). Punctuated equilibria in fact and theory. Journal of Social and Biological Structures, 12, 117–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gresov, C., Haveman, H., & Oliva, T. (1993). Organization design, inertia, and the dynamics of competitive response. Organization Science, 4(2), 181–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gribbin, J. (1984). In search of Schroedinger's cat: Quantum physics and reality. New York: Bantam Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guastello, S. (1995). Chaos, catastrophe, and human affairs. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guastello, S., Dooley, K., & Goldstein, J. (1995). Chaos, organizational theory, and organizational development. In A. Gilgen & F. Abraham (Eds.), Chaos theory in psychology (pp. 267–278). Westport, CT: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, F. (1989). Organizational ecology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayles, N. K. (1991). Introduction: Complex dynamics in science and literature. In N. K. Hayles (Ed.), Chaos and order: Complex dynamics in literature and science (pp. 1–36). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heyerbrand, W. (1977). Organizational contradictions in public bureaucracies: Toward a Marxian theory of organizations. Sociological Quarterly, 18, 83–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hock, D. W. (1995). The chaordic organization. World Business Academy Perspectives, 9(1), 5–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holland, J. H. (1995). Hidden order. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huber, G. P. (1991). Organizational learning: The contributing processes and the literatures. Organization Science, 2(1), 88–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huberman, B., & Hogg, T. (1988). The behavior of computational ecologies. In B. Huberman (Ed.), The ecology of computation (pp. 77–115). Amsterdam: North Holland Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jantsch, E. (1980). The self-organizing universe. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jayanthi, S., & Sinha, K. K. (June 1994). A Chaotic Process of Innovation: The Case of High Technology Manufacturing. TECMAN Conference, Carnegie-Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jelinek, M., & Schoonhoven, C. (1990). The innovation marathon. Cambridge: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanter, R. M., Stein, B. A., & Jick, T. D. (1992). The challenge of organizational change: How companies experience it and leaders guide it. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karakatsios, K. Z. (1990). Casim's user's guide. Nicosia, CA: Algorithmic Arts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kauffman, S. (1995). At home in the universe. Oxford: Oxford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kellert, S. (1993). In the wake of chaos. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, K. (1994). Out of control: The rise of the neo-biological society. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiel, L. D. (1994). Managing chaos and complexity in government. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiesler, S., & Sproull, L. (1982). Management response to changing environments: Perspective on problem solving from social cognition. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27(4), 548–570.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kodama, F. (1995). Emerging patterns of innovation: Sources of Japan's technological edge. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koput, K. W. (1992). Dynamics of Innovative Idea Generation in Organizations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.

  • Kuhn, T. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamprecht, J. L. (1992). ISO 9000. Milwaukee, WI: Quality Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lant, T., & Mezias, S. (1992). An organization learning model of convergence and reorientation. Organization Science, 3, 47–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, P., & Dwyer, D. (1983). Renewing American industry. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, P., & Lorsch, J. (1967). Organization and environment. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leifer, R. (1989). Understanding organizational transformation using a dissipative structure model. Human Relations, 42(10), 899–916.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leland, W., Taqqu, M., Willinger, W., & Wilson, D. (1993). On the self-similar nature of ethernet traffic. Sigcom, 93, 183–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leonard-Barton, D. (1988). Implementation as mutual adaptation of technology and organization. Research Policy, 17, 251–267.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin, G., Hirsch, G., & Roberts, E. (1972). Narcotics and the community: A system simulation. American Journal of Public Health, 62(6), 861–873.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levitt, B., & March, J. (1988). Organizational learning. Annual Review of Sociology, 14, 319–340.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levy, D. (1994). Chaos theory and strategy: Theory, application, and managerial implications. Strategic Management Journal, 15, 167–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewin, R. (1992). Complexity: Life at the edge of chaos. New York: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, G. Y., & Solberg, J. J. (1992). Integrated shop floor control using autonomous agents. IIE Transactions, 24, 57–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lumdsen, C., & Wilson, E. (1981). Genes, mind, and culture. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mandelbrot, B. (1983). The fractal geometry of nature. New York: W.H. Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • March, J. G., & Simon, H. A. (1958). Organizations. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maturana, H., & Varela, F. (1992). The tree of knowledge. Boston: Shambhala.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKelvey, B. (1982). Organizational systematics: Taxonomy, classification, evolution. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKelvey, B., & Aldrich, H. (1983). Populations, natural selection, and applied organization science. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28, 101–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, R., & Snow, C. (1978). Organizational strategy, structure, and process. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D., & Friesen, P. H. (1978). Archetypes of strategy formulation. Management Science, 24, 921–933.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg, H. (1979). The structuring of organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg, H. (1994). The rise and fall of strategic planning. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, G. (1986). Images of organizations. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka, I. (1988). Creating organizational order out of chaos: Self-renewal in Japanese firms. California Management Review, 57–73.

  • Palazzoli, M. S., Boscolo, L., Cecchin, G., & Prata, G. (1980). Hypothesizing-circularity-neutrality. Family Process, 19(1), 73–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peitgen, H.-O., Jurgens, H., & Saupe, D. (1992). Chaos and fractals: New frontiers of science. New York: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, E. E. (1991). Chaos and order in the capital markets. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prahalad, C. K., & Hamel, G. (1990). The core competence of the organization. Harvard Business Review, May–June, 79–91.

  • Priesmeyer, H. R. (1992). Organizations and chaos. Westport, CT: Quorum Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prigogine, I., & Stengers, I. (1984). Order out of chaos. New York: Bantam Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reger, R., Gustafson, L., Demarie, S., & Mullane, J. (1994). Reframing the organization: Why implementing total quality is easier said than done. Academy of Management Review, 19, 565–584.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, E. (1963). The design of management control systems. Management Technology, 3(2), 100–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenkopf, L., & Tushman, M. (1994). The coevolution of technology and organization. In J. Baum and J. Singh (Eds.), Evolutionary dynamics of organizations (pp. 403–424). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saraph, J., Benson, P., & Schroeder, R. (1989). An instrument for measuring the critical factors of quality management. Decision Sciences, 20, 810–829.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schein, E. (1992). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schon, D. (1975). Deutero-learning in organizations: Learning for increased effectiveness. Organizational Dynamics, 4(1), 2–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline. New York: Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1947). Administrative behavior. New York: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1952). On the application of servomechanism theory in the study of production control. Econometrica, 20(2), 247–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sitkin, S., Sutcliffe, K., & Schroeder, R. (1994). Distinguishing control from learning in total quality management: A contigency perspective. Academy of Management Review, 19(3), 537–564.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spencer, B. (1994). Models of organizational and total quality management: A comparison and critical evaluation. Academy of Management Review, 19, 446–471.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stacey, R. (1992). Managing the unknowable. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoneman, P. (1983). The economic analysis of technological change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thietart, R. A., & Forgues, B. (1995). Chaos theory and organization. Organization Science, 6, 19–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, F. (1911). Principles of scientific management. New York: Harper & Bros.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tichy, N., & Ulrich, D. (1984). The leadership challenge—a call for transformational leader. Sloan Management Review, Fall, 59–63.

  • Treacy, M., & Wiersema, F. (1995). The discipline of market leaders. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tushman, M. L., & Romanelli, E. (1985). Organizational evolution: A metamorphis model of convergence and reorientation. Research in Organizational Behavior, 7, 171–222.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tushman, M. L., Newman, W., & Romanelli, E. (1986). Convergence and upheaval: Managing the unsteady pace of organizational evolution. California Management Review, 29(1), 29–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyre, M., & Orlikowski, W. (1994). Windows of opportunity: Temporal patterns of technological adaptation. Organization Science, 5, 98–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van de Ven, A., & Garud, R. (1994). The coevolution of technical and institutional events in the development of an innovation. In J. Baum and J. Singh (Eds.), Evolutionary dynamics of organizations (pp. 425–443). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van de Ven, A. H., & Poole, M. S. (1995). Explaining development and change in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 20, 510–540.

    Google Scholar 

  • Virany, B., Tushman, T. L., & Romanelli, E. (1992). Executive succession and organization outcomes in turbulent environments: An organization learning approach. Organization Science, 3, 72–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Bertalanffy, L. (1968). General systems theory. New York: Braziller.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waldrop, M. M. (1992). Complexity: The emerging science at the edge of chaos. New York: Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. (1979). The social psychology of organization. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheatley, M. (1992). Leadership and the new science. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiener, N. (1948). Cybernetics. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiggins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review, 94, 319–340.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B. (1993). The inherent drive towards chaos. In P. Lorange, B. Chakravarthy, J. Roos, and A. Van de Ven (Eds.), Implementing strategic processes: Change, learning, and cooperation (pp. 373–393). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dooley, K.J. A Complex Adaptive Systems Model of Organization Change. Nonlinear Dynamics Psychol Life Sci 1, 69–97 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022375910940

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022375910940

Navigation