Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Creating ‘Rhizomatic Systems’ for Understanding Complexity in Organizations

  • 223 Accesses

  • 4 Citations

Abstract

The article describes and demonstrates the use of a new research proposal for understanding the complexity in organizations in terms of a Deleuzian sense of an event. It creates the rhizome metaphor that allows the emergence of different ways of systems thinking, a legitimate challenge to the Modernist’s orthodoxy. For Deleuze and Guattari, micropolitics are the essence of what we call ‘rhizomatic systems.’ It is this concept of the organization, as a rhizome or rhizomatic systems that we want to focus from ‘problem solving’ in a real-world situation to the process of problematization, that is, the making or appreciating a series of events in the problematizing fields. The paper draws on the research experience in which participatory action research was carried out in a Korean distribution company. The participatory learning process happened to create a series of events in which ‘time-related research’ was conducted in order to facilitate the process of problematization within the organization.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Notes

  1. 1.

    That sometimes means ‘true statements’ (Flynn 1985, p. 534). However, it is not accurate English translation for French word l’énoncé for which there is no English equivalent.

  2. 2.

    The notion of the problematizing fields implies the particular and contingent process of problematization which happens between the local discursive fields and nondiscursive fields. The problematizing fields are conceived as having the following twin dimensions: The first dimension refers to the nature of the actual problematizing fields (i.e. the problem situation which happens within the nondiscursive fields). The other dimension refers to the virtual problematizing fields (i.e. the process of problematization proceeds in terms of making a series of events).

References

  1. Borda OF (1996) Power/knowledge and emancipation. Syst Pract 9(2):177–181

  2. Checkland PB (1981) Systems thinking, systems practice. Wiley, Chichester

  3. Checkland P, Scholes J (1990) Soft systems methodology in action. Wiley, Chichester

  4. Coghlan D, Shani AB (2005) Roles, politics, and ethics in action research design. Syst Pract Action Res 18(6):533–546

  5. Dash DP (1997) Problems of action research—as I see it. Working Paper, 14, University of Linconlnshire and Humberside

  6. Deleuze G (1969 [1990]). Logique du sense, Les Editions De Minut, Paris: The Logic of Sense, (trans. Lester M With Stivale C). Althlone, London

  7. Deleuze G (1986) Cinema 1: The Movement-Image, (trans. Tomlinson H and Habberjam B), Athlone, London

  8. Deleuze G (1988) Foucault. Athlone, London

  9. Deleuze G (1989) Cinema 2: The Time-Image, (trans. Tomlinson H and Galeta R), Athlone, London

  10. Deleuze G (1994) Difference & Repetition, (trans. Patton P). Athlone, London

  11. Deleuze G, Guattari F (1977) Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia, (trans. Hurley R Seem M and Lane H). University of Minnesota, Minneapolis

  12. Deleuze G, Guattari F (1988) A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia, (trans. Massumi B), The Athlone Press, London

  13. Dreyfus HL, Rabinow P (1982) Michel foucault: Beyond structuralism and hermeneutics. Harvester Wheatsheaf, New York

  14. Easterby-Smith M, Thrope R, Lowe A (1991) Management research: An introduction. Sage, London

  15. Espejo R (2000) Self-construction of desirable social systems. Kybernetes 29(7/8):949–964

  16. Espejo R, Pheby K (2000) Transduction, Recursive Logic and Identities of the Self, Syncho ltd (www.syncho.com/papers/transduction.htm)

  17. Flood RL (1987) Complexity: A definition by construction of a conceptual framework. Syst Res 4:177–185.

  18. Flood RL, Carson ER (1988) Dealing with complexity: An introduction to the theory and application of systems science. Press, New York

  19. Flood RL, Jackson MC (1991) Creative problem solving: Total systems intervention. Wiley, Chichester

  20. Flynn T (1985) Truth and subjectivation in the later Foucault. J Philos 531–539

  21. Foucault M (1972) The archaeology of knowledge. Routledge, London (originally published as L’Archeologie du Savoir in 1969)

  22. Foucault M (1980) Power/knowledge. The Harvester Press, London

  23. Foucault M (1981) The History of Sexuality, vol 1. An Introduction, Penguin Books, London

  24. Foucault M (1984a) The History of Sexuality, vol 2. The use of pleasure, Korean version (1997), (trans. Mun K J and Shin E Y), Nanam, Seoul Korea

  25. Foucault M (1984b) The History of Sexuality, vol 3. The Care of the Self, Korean version (1991), (trans. Lee H S and Lee Y M), Nanam, Seoul Korea

  26. Foucault M (1988a) The Return of morality. In: Kritzman L (ed) (1988), q.v., pp. 242–254, (interview with Gilles Barbadette and Andrè Scala appeared in Les Nouvelles, June 28, 1984)

  27. Foucault M (1988b) Technologies of the Self, In: Martin L et al (eds) (1988), q.v., pp. 16–49

  28. Jackson N, Carter P (2000) Rethinking organisational behaviour, Financial Times. Prentice Hall, Harlow

  29. Lee H, Liebenau J (1999) Time in organisational studies: Towards a new research direction. Organ Stud 20(6):1035–1058

  30. Lee JW (1999) The age of simulacre: Deleuze and his philosophy of events. Keorum, Seoul, Korea

  31. McIntyre J (2004) Facilitating critical systemic praxis (CSP) by means of experiential learning and conceptual tools. Syst Res Behav Sci 21:37–61

  32. Schwaninger M (2004) What can cybernetics contribute to the conscious evolution of organizations and society? Syst Res Behav Sci 21(5):515–527

  33. Styhre A, Sundgren M (2005) Action research as experimentation. Syst Pract Actions Res 18(1):53–65

  34. Tsouvalis C (1995) Agonistic thinking in problem-solving: The case of soft system methodology., Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Lancaster

  35. Young J (2005) On insiders (Emic) and outsiders (Etic): Views of self, and othering. Syst Pract Action Res 18(2):151–162

  36. Yu JE (2001) Towards rhizomatic systems thinking in management science, DPhil Dissertation, University of Lincoln, UK

  37. Yu JE (2004) Reconsidering participatory action research for organizational transformation and social change. J Organ Transform Soc Change 1(2&3):111–141, Intellect

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Jae Eon Yu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Yu, J.E. Creating ‘Rhizomatic Systems’ for Understanding Complexity in Organizations. Syst Pract Act Res 19, 337–349 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-006-9022-8

Download citation

Keywords

  • Deleuzian sense of an event
  • The rhizome metaphor
  • Micropolitics
  • Problematization
  • Participatory action research