Abstract
This article is about the effects of the semantics "complexity and change" used for intraorganizational communication about the relation between organization and environment. Our hypothesis is that communications along this semantic will have profound effects on the organization as to steering as it undermines the idea of organizational unity and establishes the future or utopia as the frame of reference for communication around steering. Our empirical findings from the development in the Danish central administration points in that direction. This is not necessarily implying organizational breakdown, however it might provide the basis for "oscillocracy" that is steering through acceleration of communicative flexibility and ambiguity. As theoretical frame we have chosen the German sociologist Niklas Luhmann and his communicative systems theory, which is introduced at the beginning of the article. In the central part, we present our empirical findings and at the end of the article we reflect upon oscillation.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Andersen, N. Å. (1994). Forvaltningspolitikkens udvikling. In Lægreid, P. and Pedersen, O. K. (eds.), Forvaltningspolitik i Norden, Jurist-og Økonomforbundets Forlag, Copenhagen, pp. 29–63.
Andersen, N. Å. (1995). Selvskabt forvaltning, Nyt fra Samfundsvidenskaberne, Copenhagen.
Andersen, N. Å. (1997). Udlicitering—Strategi og historie, Nyt fra Samfundsvidenskaberne, Copenhagen.
Andersen, N. Å. (1999). Politisk administration. In Torfing, J. (eds.). Diskursteorien på arbejde, Roskilde Universitets Forlag, Roskilde, pp. 71–103.
Andersen, N. Å. (2000). Public market—Political firms. Acta Sociol., forthcoming.
Andersen, N. Å, and Born, A. (1997). Complexity and “the love of learning and the desire for God,” a defence for the oscillocratic organization. In Proceedings from the Conference Organizing in a Multivoiced World, Leuven, Belgium.
Andersen, N. Å, and Kjaer, P. (1996). Institutional construction and change: An analytical strategy of institutional history. COS rapport nr. 5/1996, CBS. DK ISSN 0903-6695.
Beck, U. (1986). Risikogesellschaft, Auf dem Weg in eine andere Moderne. Suhrkamp Frankfurt a.M.
Born, A., and Goldschmidt, L. (1997). Legal regulation and communicative couplings. Law Policy, 19(1), 23–51.
Crozier, M., and Friedberg, E. (1977). L'acteur et le Système. Éditions du Seuil, Paris.
Foucault, M. (1980). The History of Sexuality. Vintage Books, London.
Foucault, M. (1972). The Archaeology of Knowledge. Tavistock Publications, London.
Koselleck, R. (1982). Begriffgeschichte and social history. Economy Soc., 11(4) p 409–427.
Koselleck, R. (1985a). “Space of Experience” and “Horizon of Expectation”: Two historical categories. In Koselleck, R. (ed.), Future Past, The MIT Prss, London, pp. 267–288.
Koselleck, R. (1985b). The historical-political semantics of asymmetric counterconcepts. In Koselleck, R. (ed.), Future Past, The MIT Press, London, pp. 159–197.
Luhmann, N. (1971). Politische Planung. Aufsätze zur Sociologie von Politik und Verwaltung. Westdeutscher Verlag Opladen, Bielefeld.
Luhmann, N. (1982a). The self-thematization of society. In Luhmann, N. (ed.), The Differentiation of Society, Columbia University Press, New York, pp. 327–328.
Luhmann, N. (1982b). World-time and system history. In Luhmann, N. 9ed.), The Differentiation of Society, Columbia University Press, New York, p. 307.
Luhmann, N. (1985). Complexity and meaning. In Aida, S., et al. (eds.), The Science and Praxis of Complexity, Tokyo, The United Nations University, p. 99–104.
Luhmann, N. (1990). Meaning as sociology's basic concept. Essays on Self-Reference, Columbia University Press, New York, pp. 21–79.
Luhmann, N. (1991). Die form “person”. Soziale Welt 42, Universität Barmberg, Barmberg, pp. 166–175.
Luhmann, N. (1993a). Deconstruction as second-order observing. New Literary History, 24, 763–782.
Luhmann, N. (1993b). Gesellschaftsstruktur und Semantik, Band I, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main, pp. 9–72.
Luhmann, N. (1993c). Risk a Sociological Theory, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, New York.
Luhmann, N. (1995). Social Systems. Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA.
Luhmann, N. (1997a). Die Gesellschaft der Gesellschaft, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt.
Luhmann, N. (1997b). Limits of steering. Theory, Culture Society. 14(1), 41–57.
Nielsen, K., and Pedersen, O. K. (1991). From the mixed economy to the negotiated economy: The Scandinavian countries. In Coughlin, R. M. (eds.), Morality, Rationality, and Efficiency, New Perspectives on Socio-Economics, M. E. Sharpe, New York, pp. 145–165.
Pedersen, O. K. (1993). The institutional history of the Danish polity. From a market-and mixed-to a negotiated economy. In Sjøstrand, Sv.E., (eds.): Institutional Change: Theories and Empirical Finding, M. E. Sharpe, New York, pp. 277–299.
Rhodes, R. A. W., and March, D. (1992). New Directions in the study of Policy Networks. Europ. J. Political Res. 21(1—2), 181–202.
Teubner, G. (1983). Substantive and reflexive elements in modern law. Law Society Rev. 2, 239–285.
Teubner, G. (1992). Social order from legislative noise: Autopoietic closure as a problem for legal regulation. In Teubner, G., and Febbrajo, A. (eds.), State Law and Economy as Autopoietic Systems: Regulation and Autonomy in a New, European Yearbook in the Sociology of Law, vol. 1991—1992, Dott. A. Fuiffré Editore, Milano, pp. 609–649.
Willke, H. (1992). Societal guidance through law?. In Teubner, G. and Febbrajo, A., (eds.), State Law and Economy as Autopoietic Systems: Regulation and Autonomy in a New, European Yearbook in the Sociology of Law, vol. 1991—1992, Dott. A. Guiffré Editore, Milano, pp. 353–387.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Andersen, N.Å., Born, A.W. Complexity and Change: Two "Semantic Tricks" in the Triumphant Oscillating Organization. Systemic Practice and Action Research 13, 297–328 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009511026806
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009511026806