Complex Systems in Organizations and Their Influence on Human Resource Management

Conference paper
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Complexity book series (SPCOM)

Abstract

Although complex systems have been part of organizational studies for several decades, they have witnessed significant changes in recent years. This research builds on existent work on complex systems by focusing on the shift toward power-law distributions. Evidentially, HRM is highly nested in those complex systems. Due to the advancements in the theoretical understanding of complexity and influenced by these, HRM is also shifting in new directions, especially towards a dynamic approach. In consequence, a new notion of a dynamic HRM is emerging, which could be characterized as “function follows process”. Accordingly, understanding HRM as complex systems, HRM needs to observe the dynamic core of its processes as well as the outcomes of a changed governing distribution and derive from these its alternating functionality.

Keywords

Complex systems Human resource management Organizational behavior 

References

  1. 1.
    Maguire S, Allen P, McKelvey B (2011) Complexity and management: introducing the SAGE handbook. In: Allen P, Maguire S, McKelvey B (eds) The SAGE handbook of complexity and management. Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp 1–26 Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Eoyang GH (2011) Complexity and the dynamics of organizational change. In: Allen P, Maguire S, McKelvey B (eds) The SAGE handbook of complexity and management. Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp 317–332 Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Maguire S, McKelvey B, Mirabeau L, Öztas N (2006) Complexity science and organization studies. In: Clegg SR, Hardy C, Lawrence TB, Nord WR (eds) The SAGE handbook of organization studies. Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp 165–214 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Marion R (1999) The edge of organization: chaos and complexity theories of formal social organizations. Sage, Thousand Oaks, Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Marion R (2008) Complexity theory for organizations and organizational leadership. In: Uhl-Bien M, Marion R (eds) Complexity leadership. Information Age, Charlotte, pp 1–16 Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Barabási A-L (2003) In: Linked. Plume, London Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pfeffer J (2010) Building sustainable organizations: the human factor. Acad Manag Perspect 24:34–45 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Marion R, Uhl-Bien M (2011) Implications of complexity science for the study of leadership. In: Allen P, Maguire S, McKelvey B (eds) The SAGE handbook of complexity and management. Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp 385–399 Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sydow J, Schreyögg G, Koch J (2009) Organizational path dependence: opening the black box. Acad Manag Rev 34:689–709 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Andriani P, McKelvey B (2011) Managing in a Pareto world calls for new thinking. Management 14:89–118 Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Anderson C (2006) The long tail. Random House, London Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Newman MEJ (2005) Power laws, Pareto distributions and Zipf’ law. Contemp Phys 46:325–351 ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Alber R, Jeong H, Barabási A-L (2000) Error and attack tolerance of complex networks. Nature 406:378–382 ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Leana C, Barry B (2000) Stability and change as simultaneous experiences in organizational life. Acad Manag Rev 25:753–760 Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Morin E (2008) On complexity. Hampton, Cresskil Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Barabási A-L (2012) The network takeover. Nat Phys 8:14–16 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Chair for Human Resource Management and Organizational BehaviorUniversity of SiegenSiegenGermany

Personalised recommendations