Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Harnessing Complexity: Putting Principles of Culturo-Behavioral Science and Self-Organizing Systems to Work in the Design of Adaptive Organizations

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Behavior and Social Issues Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Culturo-behavioral science is a rapidly developing field within behavior analysis, seeking to integrate concepts from behavior analysis with concepts from fields outside of behavior analysis, including systems theory, anthropology, and biology, for example. The goal of culturo-behavioral science is to expand our understanding beyond the behavior of the individual to include complex interactions among and between individuals. This has led to the development of the metacontingency (Glenn, 1986, 1988) and its integration with behavioral systems analysis. In the present article, I will use the integration of these two frameworks, informed by concepts and principles from systems theory; its close relative, cybernetics; information theory; and the theory of self-organizing systems to begin to define principles and conditions that may develop a further understanding of the causes that govern self-organizing, adaptive organizations. Toward that end, I will also inform the discussion with concepts from other areas of behavior analysis, including schedule theory, rule-governed behavior, and some recent investigation into the structures of behavioral systems.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Data availability

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no additional data, material, code, and so forth associated with the information in this article beyond that which has been presented herein.

References

  • Abernathy, W. B. (1996). The sin of wages. Aubrey Daniels International.

  • Abernathy, W. B. (2000). Managing without supervising: Creating an organization-wide performance system. Aubrey Daniels International.

  • Abernathy, W. B. (2008). Implications and applications of a behavior systems perspective. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 29(2), 175–192. https://doi.org/10.1080/01608060802100980

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abernathy, W. B. (2009). Walden Two revisited: Optimizing behavioral systems. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 29(2), 175–192. https://doi.org/10.1080/01608060902874567

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashby, W. R. (1957). An introduction to cybernetics. Chapman & Hall. (Original work published in 1956)

  • Baron, A., & Galizio, M. (2005). Positive and negative reinforcement: Should the distinction be preserved? The Behavior Analyst, 28(2), 85–98. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03392107

  • Baum, W. M. (1992). In search of the feedback function for variable-interval schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 57(3), 365–375. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1992.57-365

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Baum, W. M. (1993). Performance on ratio and interval schedules of reinforcement: Data and theory. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 59(2), 245–264. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1993.59-245

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Baum, W. M. (2018). Multiscale behavior analysis and molar behaviorism: An overview. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 110(3), 302–322. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.476

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Beer, S. (1979). The heart of the enterprise. John Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brethower, D. (1972). A total performance system. Behaviordelia.

  • Catania, A. C. (1988). Problems of selection and phylogeny, terms and methods of behaviorism. In Catania, A. C., & Harnad, S. R. (eds.), The selection of behavior: The operant behaviorism of B. F. Skinner: Comments and consequences. Cambridge University Press. 474–482.

  • Catania, A. C., & Harnad, S. R. (1988). The Selection of Behavior: The Operant Behaviorism of B. F. Skinner: Comments and Consequences. Cambridge University Press.

  • Cihon, T. M., & Mattaini, M. A. (2019). Editorial: Emerging cultural and behavioral systems science. Perspectives on Behavioral Science, 42(4) , 699–711. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-019-00237-8

  • Couto, K. C. (2019). Tutorial: Selection of cultures and the role of recurrent contingencies and interlocking behavioral contingencies. Behavior and Social Issues, 28, 37–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42822-019-0001-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Couto, K. C., & Sandaker, I. (2016). Natural, behavioral and cultural selection-analysis: An integrative approach. Behavior and Social Issues, 25, 54–60. https://doi.org/10.5210/bsi.v25i0.6891

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daniels, A. C. (1989). Performance management. Performance Management Publications.

  • Daniels, A. C. (2000). Bringing out the best in people. McGraw Hill.

  • Donahoe, J. W., & Palmer, D. C. (1994). Learning and complex behavior. Allyn & Bacon.

  • Forrester, J. W. (1968). Principles of systems. Productivity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foxall, G. R. (1999). The marketing firm. Journal of Economic Psychology, 20(2) , 207–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-4870(99)00005-7 

  • Foxall, G. R. (2015). Consumer behavior analysis and the marketing firm: Bilateral contingency in the context of environmental concern. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 35(1–2), 44–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/01608061.2015.1031426

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galbicka, G. (1992). The dynamics of behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 57(3), 243–248. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1992.57-243

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Glenn, S. S. (1986). Metacontingencies in Walden Two. Behavior Analysis and Social Action, 5, 2–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glenn, S. S. (1988). Contingencies and metacontingencies: Toward a synthesis of behavior analysis and cultural materialism. The Behavior Analyst, 11, 161–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glenn, S. S. (1991). Contingencies and metacontingencies: Relations among behavioral, cultural, and biological evolution. In P. A. Lamal (Ed.), Behavior analysis of societies and cultural practices (pp. 39–73). Hemisphere Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glenn, S. S. (2004). Individual behavior, culture, and social change. The Behavior Analyst, 27, 133–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glenn, S. S., & Malott, M. E. (2004). Complexity and selection: Implications for organizational change. Behavior and Social Issues, 13, 89–106. https://doi.org/10.5210/bsi.v13i2.378

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glenn, S. S., Malott, M. E., Andery, M. A. P. A., Benvenuti, M., Houmanfar, R. A., Sandaker, I., Todorov, J. C., Tourinho, E. Z., & Vasconcelos, L. A. (2016). Toward consistent terminology in a behaviorist approach to cultural analysis. Behavior and Social Issues, 25, 11–27. https://doi.org/10.5210/bsi.v25i0.6634

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hardin, G. (1968). The tragedy of the commons. Science, 162, 1243–1248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, L. J., Dubuque, E. M., Fryling, M. J., & Pritchard, J. K. (2009). A behavioral systems analysis of behavior analysis as a scientific system. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 29(3–4), 315–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Houmanfar, R., Rodrigues, N. J., & Ward, T. A. (2010). Emergence and metacontingency: Points of contact and departure. Behavior and Social Issues, 19, 53–78. https://doi.org/10.5210/bsi.v19i0.3065

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hudson, C. G. (2000). From social Darwinism to self-organization: Implications for social change theory. Social Service Review, 74, 533–559. https://doi.org/10.1086/516424

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, C. S. (2012). Analysing behavioral and cultural selection contingencies. Revista Latinoamericana de Psicología, 44(1), 43–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hyten, C. (2009). Strengthening the focus on business results: The need for systems approaches in organizational behavior management. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 29(2), 87–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/01608060902874526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kauffman, S. A. (1993). The origins of order: Self-organization and selection in evolution. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kauffman, S. A. (1995). At home in the universe: The search for laws of self-organization and complexity. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kauffman, S. A. (2000). Investigations. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kauffman, S. A. (2008). Reinventing the sacred: A new view of science, reason, and religion. Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krispin, J. V. (2016). What is the metacontingency? Deconstructing claims of emergence and cultural-level selection. Behavior and Social Issues, 25, 28–41. https://doi.org/10.5210/bsi.v25i0.6186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krispin, J. (2017). Positive feedback loops of metacontingencies: A new conceptualization of cultural-level selection. Behavior and Social Issues, 26, 95–110. https://doi.org/10.5210/bsi.v26i0.7397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krispin, J. V. (2019). Culturo-behavioral hypercycles and the metacontingency: Incorporating self-organizing dynamics into an expanded model of cultural change. Perspectives on Behavior Science, 42(4), 869–887. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-019000212-3

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Krugman, P. (1996). The self-organizing economy. Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malott, M. E. (2003). Paradox of organizational change. Context Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malott, M. E., & Glenn, S. S. (2019). Integrating institutional and culturo-behavioral analyses in the management of common pool resources: Application to an inland lake in Michigan. Behavior and Social Issues, 28, 248–268. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42822-019-00014-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malott, R. W. (1993). A theory of rule-governed behavior and organizational behavior management. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 12(2), 45–65. https://doi.org/10.1300/J075v12n02_03

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marr, J. (1996). A mingled yarn. The Behavior Analyst, 19, 19–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marr, J. (2006). Behavior analysis and social dynamics: Some questions and concerns. Behavior and Social Issues, 15, 57–67. https://doi.org/10.5210/bsi.v15i1.345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mattaini, M. (2004). Systems, metacontingencies, and cultural analysis: Are we there yet? Behavior and Social Issues, 13, 124–130. https://doi.org/10.5210/bsi.v13i2.20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mattaini, M. A. (2006). Will cultural analysis become a science? Behavior and Social Issues, 15, 68–80. https://doi.org/10.5210/bsi.v15i1.380

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mattaini, M. A. (2007). Editorial: Technical language in cultural analysis. Behavior and Social Issues, 16, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.5210/bsi.v16i1.1811

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michael, J. (2004a). Positive and negative reinforcement, a distinction that is no longer necessary: Or a better way to talk about bad things. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 24(1–2), 207–222. https://doi.org/10.1300/J075v24n01_15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michael, J. (2004b). Positive psychology and the distinction between positive and negative reinforcement. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 24(1–2), 145–153. https://doi.org/10.1300/J075v24n01_09

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nergaard, S. K., & Holth, P. (2019). A critical review of the support for variability as an operant dimension. Perspectives on Behavior Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-020-00262-y

  • Nicolis, G., & Prigogine, I. (1989). Exploring complexity. W. H. Freeman and Company.

  • Prigogine, I. (1961). Introduction to thermodynamics of irreversible processes. Interscience Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prigogine, I. (1980). From being to becoming: Time and complexity in the physical sciences. W. H.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prigogine, I. (1996). The end of certainty: Time, chaos, and the new laws of nature. The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prigogine, I., & Stengers, I. (1984). Order out of chaos: Man’s new dialogue with nature. Bantam Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandaker, I. (2009). A selectionist perspective on systemic and behavioral change in organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 29(3–4), 276–293. https://doi.org/10.1080/01608060903092128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandaker, I., Couto, K., & de Carvalho, L. C. (2019). Selection at three levels of organization: Does structure matter? Behavior and Social Issues, 28, 221–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42822-019-00020-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shannon, C. E. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. The Bell System Technical Journal. (27). 379-423. DOI: 10.1002/j.1538-7305.1948.tb01338.x

  • Senge, P. M. (1991). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. Doubleday Currency.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sidman, M. (1960). Tactics of scientific research. Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skinner, B. F. (1969). Contingencies of reinforcement. XanEdu Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skinner, B. F. (1981). Selection by consequences. Science, 213, 501–504. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.7244649

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Skinner, B. F. (1988). Responses to commentaries. In A. C. Catania & S. Harnad (Eds.), The selection of behavior: The operant behaviorism of B. F. Skinner. Cambridge University Press. p. 483–488.

  • Ulanowicz, R. E. (2009). A third window. Templeton Foundation Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaughn, M. (1989). Rule-governed behavior in behavior analysis: A theoretical and experimental history. In S. C. Hayes (Ed.), Rule-governed behavior: Cognition, contingencies & instructional control (pp. 97–118). Context Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Bertalanffy, L. (1968). General system theory. George Braziller.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiner, N. (1961). Cybernetics: Or control and communication in the animal and the machine. John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, D. S., Hayes, S. C., Biglan, A., & Embry, D. D. (2014). Evolving the future: Toward a science of intentional change. Behavior Brain Science, 37(4), 395–416. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X13001593

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yates, F. E. (1983). What is self-organization? Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yates, F. E. (1987). Self-organizing systems: The emergence of order. Plenum Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Zeiler, M. D. (1992). On immediate function. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 57(3), 417–427. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1992.57-417

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Zettle, R. D., & Hayes, S. C. (1982). Rule governed behavior: A potential theoretical framework for cognitive-behavior therapy. In P. C.Kendall (Ed.), Advances in Cognitive-Behavioral Research and Therapy (Vol. 1; p. 73-118). Academic Press.

  • Zilio, D. (2019). On the function of science: An overview of 30 years of publications on metacontingency. Behavior and Social Issues. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42822-019-00006-x

Download references

Funding

No additional funding for this article was provided other than basic employment with Valdosta State University.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Management and Healthcare Administration, Langdale College of Business Administration, Valdosta State University, 1500 N. Patterson St, Valdosta, GA, 31698, USA

    Jonathan Krispin

Authors
  1. Jonathan Krispin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jonathan Krispin.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there have been no violations of ethical standards and no requirement for review of ethics for the work contained within this article.

Informed consent

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there was no requirement for consent to participate. The work contained within this article is theoretical in nature.

Consent for publication

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author grants consent for publication for this article to Behavior and Social Issues.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Krispin, J. Harnessing Complexity: Putting Principles of Culturo-Behavioral Science and Self-Organizing Systems to Work in the Design of Adaptive Organizations. Behav. Soc. Iss. 30, 170–193 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42822-021-00063-1

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42822-021-00063-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation