Systemic Practice and Action Research

, Volume 26, Issue 5, pp 377–395

Collaborative Capability Design: Redundancy of Potentialities

  • John W. Selsky
  • Rafael Ramírez
  • Oğuz N. Babüroğlu
Original Paper

Abstract

In this study we extend the socio-ecological concept of two contrasting design principles applicable to all work systems. Reframing those design principles as strategic as well as operational choices leads us to propose a third design principle, Design Principle 3 (DP3), which has remained undeveloped in social ecology. We call this design principle Redundancy of Potentialities and demonstrate its application in transorganizational work systems. We argue that DP3 is at the core of socio-ecological practice and is therefore appropriate for coping with the highly turbulent environments now experienced in many industries and fields. We offer several illustrations of DP3 in practice and draw implications for enhancing capabilities for creative collaboration in inter-organizational fields through deliberate attention to design.

Keywords

Design principle Social ecology Trans-organization İnter-organizational field Capabilities 

References

  1. Ackoff R (1975) Redesigning the future. John Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Ackoff RL (1999) Re-creating the corporation: a design of organizations for the 21st century. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  3. Ackoff RL, Emery FE (1972) On purposeful systems. Aldine-Atherton, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  4. Aldrich H (1999) Organizations evolving. Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  5. Anderson C (2009) Free: the future of a radical price. Hyperion, Santa ClaraGoogle Scholar
  6. Babüroğlu O (1988) The vortical environment: the fifth in the Emery–Trist levels of organizational environments. Hum Relat 41:181–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Babüroğlu O (1992) Tracking the development of the Emery–Trist systems paradigm (ETSP). Syst Pract 5(3):263–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Barton J, Selsky J (2000) Toward an Emery model of management: implications and prospects of Emery open systems theory. Syst Pract Action Res 13(5):705–720CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Barton J, Emery M, Flood R, Selsky J, Wolstenholme E (2004) A maturing of systems thinking? Evidence from three perspectives. Syst Pract Action Res 17(1):3–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Beck U, Holzer B (2007) Organizations in world risk society. In: Pearson C, Roux-Dufort C, Clair J (eds) International handbook of organizational crisis management. Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp 3–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Beyerlein M, Johnson D, Beyerlein S (eds) (2004) Complex collaboration: building the capabilities for working across boundaries, ElsevierGoogle Scholar
  12. Beyerlein M, Beyerlein S, Kennedy F (eds) (2005) Collaborative capital: creating intangible value, ElsevierGoogle Scholar
  13. Blois K, Ramírez R (2006) Capabilities as marketable assets: a proposal for a functional categorization. Ind Mark Manage 35(8):1027–1031CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bohm D (1996) On dialogue. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  15. Botsman R, Rogers R (2010) What’s mine is yours: the rise of collaborative consumption. HarperCollins, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. Brown JS, Duguid P (2000) The social life of information. Harvard Business School Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  17. Chesbrough H (2004) Managing open innovation. Res-Technol Manage 47(1):23–26Google Scholar
  18. Clegg S, Pitsis T, Rura-Polley T, Marosszeky M (2002) Governmentality matters: designing an alliance culture of inter-organizational collaboration for managing projects. Organ Stud 23(3):317–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cummings T (1984) Transorganizational development. Res Organ Behav 6:367–422Google Scholar
  20. Davis G, Marquis C (2005) Prospects for organization theory in the early 21st century: institutional fields and mechanisms. Organ Sci 16(4):332–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Demil B, Lecocq X (2006) Neither market nor hierarchy nor network: the emergence of bazaar governance. Organ Stud 27(10):1447–1466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dougherty D, Dunne D (2011) Organizing ecologies of complex innovation. Organ Sci 22(5):1214–1223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dunbar R, Starbuck W (2006) Learning to design organizations and learning from designing them. Organ Sci 17(2):171–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Emery F (1967) The next thirty years. Hum Relat 20:199–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Emery F (1969) Introduction. In: Emery F (ed) Systems thinking, vol 1. Penguin, HarmondsworthGoogle Scholar
  26. Emery F (1976) The second design principle: participation and the democratization of work. Futures we are in. Martinus-Nijhoff. 1976. Reprinted in Trist E and Murray H (eds) (1993) The social engagement of social science, volume 2, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, pp 214–233Google Scholar
  27. Emery F, Trist E (1965) The causal texture of organizational environments. Hum Relat 18:21–32 Google Scholar
  28. Emery M (1999) Searching: the theory and practice of making cultural change. John Benjamins, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  29. Emery M (2000) The current version of Emery’s open systems theory. Syst Pract Action Res 13(5):623–641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Feibleman J, Friend J (1969) The structure and function of organizations. In: Emery F (ed) Systems thinking, volume 1. Penguin, Harmondsworth, pp 30–55Google Scholar
  31. Fleming L, Waguespack D (2007) Brokerage, boundary spanning, and leadership in open innovation communities. Organ Sci 18(2):165–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Granovetter M (1985) Economic action and social structure: the problem of embeddedness. Am J Sociol 91(3):481–510CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Greenwood R, Miller D (2010) Tackling design anew: getting back to the heart of organizational theory. Acad Manage Perspect 24(4):78–88Google Scholar
  34. Hargrave T, Van de Ven A (2006) A collective action model of institutional innovation. Acad Manag Rev 31(4):864–888CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hirschhorn L (1984) Beyond mechanization: work and technology in a postindustrial age. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  36. Hirschhorn L, Gilmore T (2004) Ideas in philanthropic field building: where they come from and how they are translated into actions. Practice Matters 6, The Foundation Center. http://www.fdncenter.org/for_grantmakers/practice_matters/
  37. Hirschhorn L, Noble P, Rankin T (2001) Sociotechnical systems in an age of mass customization. J Eng Tech Manage 18:241–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Homer-Dixon T (2006) The upside of down: catastrophe, creativity, and the renewal of civilization. Island Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  39. Iansiti M, Levien R (2004) Strategy as ecology. Harvard Bus Rev 82:69–78Google Scholar
  40. Jenson J, Saint-Martin D (2006) Building blocks for a new social architecture: the LEGO™ paradigm of an active society. Policy Politics 34(3):429–451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Keidel R (1990) Triangular design: a new organizational geometry. Acad Manag Exec 4(4):21–37Google Scholar
  42. Latour B (2005) Reassembling the social: an introduction to actor-network theory. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  43. Le Masson P, Weil B, Hatchuel A (2010) Strategic management of design and innovation. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  44. Lusch R, Vargo S (2006) The service-dominant logic of marketing: dialog, debate, and directions. M.E. Sharpe, ArmonkGoogle Scholar
  45. Marot M, Selsky J, Hart W, Reddy P (2005) Research teams in an Australian biotechnology field: how intellectual property influences collaboration. In: Beyerlein M, Beyerlein S, Kennedy F (eds) Collaborative capital: creating intangible value. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 1–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. McCann J (1983) Design guidelines for social problem solving interventions. J Appl Behav Sci 19(2):177–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. McCann J, Selsky J (1984) Hyperturbulence and the emergence of type 5 environments. Acad Manag Rev 9(4):460–470Google Scholar
  48. Meyer A, Gaba V, Colwell K (2005) Organizing far from equilibrium: non-linear change in organizational fields. Organ Sci 16(5):456–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Morgan G (2006) Images of organization, New Edition edn. Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  50. Motamedi K (2012) Trans-organizations: managing in a complex and uncertain world. Graziadio Bus Rev 15(2)Google Scholar
  51. Nahapiet J, Ghoshal S (1998) Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Acad Manag Rev 23(2):242–266Google Scholar
  52. Normann R (2001) Reframing business: when the map changes the landscape. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  53. Normann R, Ramírez R (1989) A theory of the offering: a step towards a post-industrial business strategy. In: Snow C (ed) Strategy, organization, design, and human resource management. JAI Press, GreenwichGoogle Scholar
  54. Normann R, Ramírez R (1993) Designing interactive strategy: from value chain to value constellation. Harvard Bus Rev (July–August):65–77Google Scholar
  55. Normann R, Ramírez R (1994) Designing interactive strategy. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  56. Olson M (1965) The logic of collective action. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  57. Ostrom E (1990) Governing the commons. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  58. Paris Club (2006) Fifty years of orderly sovereign debt restructuring. Proceedings of the International Policy Forum, 14 June, ParisGoogle Scholar
  59. Pascal A, Thomas C, Romme AGL (2012) Developing a human-centred and science-based approach to design: the knowledge management platform project. Br J Manage. doi:10.1111/j.i467-8551.2011.00802.x Google Scholar
  60. Pava C (1983) Managing the new office technology. Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  61. Perlmutter HV (1965) Towards a theory and practice of social architecture: the building of indispensable institutions. Tavistock Publications, LondonGoogle Scholar
  62. Porter M (1985) Competitive advantage: creating and sustaining superior performance. Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  63. Powell W, Koput K, Smith-Doerr L (1996) Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: networks of learning in biotechnology. Admin Sci Q 41:116–145Google Scholar
  64. Ramírez R (1999) Value co-production: intellectual origins and implications for practice and research. Strateg Manag J 20(1):49–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Ramírez R, Selsky J, Van der Heijden K (2010) Conceptual and historical overview. In: Ramírez R, Selsky J, Van der Heijden K (eds) Business planning for turbulent times: new methods for applying scenarios. Earthscan, London, pp 17–30Google Scholar
  66. Ramírez R, van der Heijden K (2007) Scenarios to develop strategic options: a new interactive role for scenarios in strategy. In: Sharpe W, van der Heijden K (eds) Scenarios for success: turning insights into action. Wiley, Chichester, pp 89–120Google Scholar
  67. Ramírez R, Wallin C (2000) Prime movers. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  68. Rivette K, Kline D (1999) Rembrandts in the attic: unlocking the hidden value of patents. Harvard Business School Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  69. Sawhney M, Prandelli E (2000) Communities of creation: managing distributed innovation in turbulent markets. Calif Manage Rev 42(4):24–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Selsky J, Marot M, Hart W, Reddy P (2005) Building field level collaborative capital: the case of an Australian biotechnology consortium, presented at Academy of Management annual meeting, HonoluluGoogle Scholar
  71. Selsky J, McCann J (2010) Managing disruptive change and turbulence through continuous change thinking and scenarios. In: Ramírez R, Selsky J, Van der Heijden K (eds) Business planning for turbulent times: new methods for applying scenarios. Earthscan, London, pp 167–186Google Scholar
  72. Selsky J, Goes J, Baburoglu O (2007) Contrasting perspectives of strategy making: applications in ‘hyper’ environments. Organ Stud 28(1):71–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Simon H (1969) The sciences of the artificial. The MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  74. Sinha K, Van de Ven A (2005) Designing work within and between organizations. Organ Sci 16(4):389–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Trist E (1977) A concept of organizational ecology. Aust J Manage 2(2):161–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Trist E (1983a) Referent organizations and the development of inter-organizational domains. Hum Relat 36:269–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Trist E (1983b) Pava’s extension of socio-technical theory to advanced information technologies. Reprinted in Trist E and Murray H (eds) (1993) The social engagement of social science, volume 2. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, pp 662–673Google Scholar
  78. Van de Ven A, Hargrave T (2004) Social, technical, and institutional change. In: Poole MS, Van de Ven A (eds) Handbook of organizational change. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 259–303Google Scholar
  79. Vargo S, Lusch R (2004) Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing. J Mark 68(1):1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Vargo S, Lusch R (2008) Service-dominant logic: continuing the evolution. J Acad Mark Sci 36(1):1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Von Hippel E, von Krogh G (2003) Open source software and the ‘private-collective’ innovation model: issues for organization science. Organ Sci 14(2):209–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Weber S (2004) The success of open source. Harvard Business School Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  83. Wenger E (1998) Communities of practice: learning as a social system. Syst Think 9(5)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • John W. Selsky
    • 1
  • Rafael Ramírez
    • 2
  • Oğuz N. Babüroğlu
    • 3
  1. 1.College of Business, University of South FloridaLakelandUSA
  2. 2.Oxford UniversityOxfordUK
  3. 3.Sabanci UniversityIstanbulTurkey

Personalised recommendations