|
Welcome : Publications
Managing Complex Organizations: Complexity Thinking and the Science and Art of Management
Kurt A. Richardson
Emergence: Complexity & Organization, ISSN:
1521-3250,
2008,
10(2):
13-26
- ( PDF)
Abstract
This article is an attempt to explore the implications of the emerging science of complexity for the management of organizations. It is not intended as an introduction to complexity thinking, but rather an attempt
to consider how thinking ‘complexly’ might affect the way in which managers do their jobs. This is achieved in a rather abstract way with some theory, but I hope the general message that there is no one way to manage comes through loud and clear, and that management is as much an art as it is a science. In a sense complexity thinking is about limits, limits to what we can know about our organizations. And if there are limits to what we can know, then there are limits to what we can achieve in a pre-determined, planned way.
______________________
Systems Theory and Complexity: Part 4 - The Evolution of Systems Thinking
Kurt A. Richardson
Emergence: Complexity & Organization, ISSN:
1521-3250,
2007,
8(1-2):
166
- ( PDF)
Abstract
None Available
______________________
From Complicated to Complex: On the Relationship Between Connectivity and Behavior
Kurt A. Richardson
Emergence: Complexity & Organization, ISSN:
1521-3250,
2007,
8(1-2):
194-206
- ( PDF)
Abstract
A common assumption in the ‘modern’ era is that ‘being connected’ can only be a good thing for individuals and for businesses, and even nation states and continents. This short article aims to explore this assumption with the use of Boolean networks. Although the research presented here is in its early stages, it already demonstrates that there is a balance to be met between connectivity and performance, and that being well-connected does not necessarily lead to desirable network performance attributes.
______________________
Systems Thinking for Community Involvement in Policy Analysis
Gerald Midgley and Kurt A. Richardson (ed.)
Emergence: Complexity & Organization, ISSN:
1521-3250,
2007,
8.(1-2):
167-183
- ( PDF)
Abstract
This paper is the text of a presentation to the 1st International Workshop on Complexity and Policy Analysis delivered by Gerald Midgley and transcribed and edited by Kurt Richardson. It charts the development of systems thinking since the 1960s, identifying a number of different systems paradigms. These are then compared with paradigms in complexity research, and significant parallels are identified. It is argued that there are several interacting research communities (including those writing about complexity, systems thinking and cybernetics) that have the potential to learn from one another. A research program on systemic intervention is then presented, focusing on the need to think critically about boundaries and values as a means of dealing with the inevitable lack of comprehensiveness in systemic interventions. A rationale for methodological pluralism is also given. All through the paper, the theoretical and methodological ideas are illustrated with practical examples.
______________________
We’re Not In Kansas Anymore, Toto: Mapping the Strange Landscape of Complexity Theory, and Its Relationship to Project Management
Terry Cooke-Davies, Svetlana Cicmil, Lynn Crawford and Kurt A. Richardson
Project Management Journal, ISSN:
8756-9728,
2007,
38(2):
50-61
- ( PDF)
Abstract
Both practitioners and researchers in the field of project management have referred to problems caused by complexity or problems of particular significance to complex projects. In different scientific disciplines investigations into the behavior of complex dynamical systems are revealing insights that, taken together, amount to a challenge to the prevalent Cartesian/Newtonian/Enlightenment paradigm from which the practice of project management has emerged. Concepts such as nonlinearity, emergence, self-organization, and radical unpredictability have major implications for the uncodified paradigm that underpins project management practice and research. Taken together, they amount to a complementary way of thinking and talking about projects and their management that might shed new light on intractable problems that appear to plague certain areas of project management practice. One strand within complexity studies that holds particular promise is complex responsive processes of relating, a means of talking about how human beings interact and learn and how their interactions evolve over time and across space. A new program of research, of which this paper forms part, will apply this conceptual framework to the lived experience of project teams, including executive sponsors, project managers and project team members.
______________________
Systems Theory and Complexity: Part 3
Kurt A. Richardson
Emergence: Complexity & Organization, ISSN:
1521-3250,
2005,
7(2):
104-114
- ( PDF)
Abstract
In previous installments of this series (Richardson, 2004a, 2004b) I have explored a number of general systems theory laws and principles from a complex systems perspective. One of my key motivations for this is to understand (albeit in a limited way) the relationship between systems theory and its more recent incarnation, complexity theory. In part 3 I will explore six more systems principles from the perspective of complexity. As previously I will use relatively ‘simple’ Boolean networks to illustrate the main points where possible.
______________________
Simplifying Boolean Networks
Kurt A. Richardson
Advances in Complex Systems, ISSN:
0219-5259,
2005,
8(4):
365-381
- ( PDF)
Abstract
This paper explores the compressibility of complex systems by considering the simpli.cation of Boolean networks. A method, which is similar to that reported by Bastolla and Parisi is considered that is based on the removal of frozen nodes, or stable variables, and network “leaves,” i.e. those nodes with outdegree = 0. The method uses a random sampling approach to identify the minimum set of frozen nodes. This set contains the nodes that are frozen in all attractor schemes. Although the method can over-estimate the size of the minimum set of frozen nodes, it is found that the chances of .nding this minimum set are considerably greater than .nding the full attractor set using the same sampling rate. Given that the number of attractors not found for a particular Boolean network increases with the network size, for any given sampling rate, such a method provides an opportunity to either fully enumerate the attractor set for a particular network, or improve the accuracy of the random sampling approach. Indeed, the paper also shows that when it comes to the counting of attractors in an ensemble of Boolean networks, enhancing the random sample method with the simpli.cation method presented results in a signi.cant improvement in accuracy.
______________________
The Hegemony of the Physical Sciences: An Exploration in Complexity Thinking
Kurt A. Richardson
Futures, ISSN:
0016-3287,
2005,
37(7):
615-653
- ( PDF)
Abstract
Traditionally the natural sciences, particularly physics, have been regarded as the Gatekeepers of Truth. As such the legitimacy of others forms of knowledge have been called into question, particularly those methods that characterise the ‘softer’ sciences, and even the arts. This paper begins with an extended discussion concerning the main features of a complex system, and the nature of the boundaries that emerge within such systems. Subsequent to this discussion, and by assuming that the Universe at some level can be well-described as a complex system, the paper explores the notion of ontology, or existence, from a complex systems perspective. It is argued that none of the traditional objects of science, or any objects from any discipline, formal or not, can be said to be real in any absolute sense although a substantial realism may be temporarily associated with them. The limitations of the natural sciences is discussed as well as the deep connection between the ‘hard’ and the ‘soft’ sciences. As a result of this complex systems analysis, an evolutionary philosophy referred to as quasi-‘critical pluralism’ is outlined, which is more sensitive to the demands of complexity than contemporary reductionistic approaches.
______________________
General Systems Theory: The Skeleton of Science (Originally published in 1956)
Kenneth E. Boulding (with an introduction by Kurt A. Richardson)
Emergence: Complexity & Organization, ISSN:
1521-3250,
2004,
6(1-2):
127-139
- ( PDF)
Abstract
-
______________________
Review of "From Complexity to Life: On the Emergence of Life and Meaning"
Kurt A. Richardson
Emergence: Complexity & Organization, ISSN:
1521-3250,
2004,
6(1-2):
157-159
- ( PDF)
Abstract
-
______________________
Systems Theory and Complexity: Part 1
Kurt A. Richardson
Emergence: Complexity & Organization, ISSN:
1521-3250,
2004,
6(3):
75-79
- ( PDF)
Abstract
None Available
______________________
Systems Theory and Complexity: Part 2
Kurt A. Richardson
Emergence: Complexity & Organization, ISSN:
1521-3250,
2004,
6(4):
77-82
- ( PDF)
Abstract
In the first part of the series (Richardson, 2004) I discussed four general systems laws / principles: namely, the 2nd law of thermodynamics, the complementary law, the system holism principle, and the eighty-twenty principle - in terms of complexity thinking. In this part I continue my analysis of systems theory, by considering the following laws / principles: Law of requisite variety; Hierarchy principle; Redundancy of resources principle; High-flux principle.
______________________
Introduction to 'General Systems Theory: The Skeleton Science'
Kurt A. Richardson
Emergence: Complexity & Organization, ISSN:
1521-3250,
2004,
6(1-2):
127
- ( PDF)
Abstract
None Available
______________________
Why Classical Papers?
Kurt A. Richardson
Emergence: Complexity & Organization, ISSN:
1521-3250,
2004,
6(1-2):
100-101
- ( PDF)
Abstract
None Available
______________________
Book review of 'From Complexity to Life: On the Emergence of Life and Meaning'
Kurt A. Richardson
Emergence: Complexity & Organization, ISSN:
1521-3250,
2004,
6(1-2):
157-159
- ( PDF)
Abstract
None Available
______________________
The Problematization of Existence: Towards a Philosophy of Existence
Kurt A. Richardson
Nonlinear Dynamics, Psychology, and Life Sciences, ISSN:
1090-0578,
2004,
8(1):
17-40
- ( PDF)
Abstract
By assuming that the Universe is best described as a cellular automaton, and by making use of results from the field of computational mechanics, this paper discusses an extension of the notion of existence from a simple binary opposition to that of a continuum. It is argued that none of the traditional objects of science, or any objects from any discipline, formal or not, can be said to be real in any absolute sense though a substantial realism may be associated with them. By problematising existence it is proposed that an evolutionary philosophy referred to as critical pluralism is more sensitive to the demands of complexity than contemporary scientific approaches. Though many of the conclusions reported herein are not original, the fact that they can be ‘proved’ in a scientific sense, and explored scientifically, is certainly of interest and is an interpretation of complexity theory that has received little attention.
______________________
Models without Morals: Towards the Ethical Use of Business Models
Michael R. Lissack and Kurt A. Richardson
Emergence, ISSN:
1521-3250,
2003,
5(2):
72-102
- ( PDF)
Abstract
None Available
______________________
When Modeling Social Systems, Models 'do not equal' the Modeled: Reacting to Wolfram's 'A New Kind of Science'
Michael R. Lissack and Kurt A. Richardson
Emergence, ISSN:
1521-3250,
2002,
3(4):
95–111
- ( PDF)
Abstract
None available
______________________
On the Status of Boundaries, both Natural and Organizational: A Complex Systems Perspective
Kurt A. Richardson and Michael R. Lissack
Emergence, ISSN:
1521-3250,
2002,
3(4):
32-49
- ( PDF)
Abstract
None available
______________________
Methodological Implications of Complex Systems Approaches to Sociality: Some Further Remarks
Kurt A. Richardson
Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, ISSN:
1460-7425,
2002,
5(2):
11 (e-publication)
- ( PDF)
Abstract
In a paper published in JASSS, Chris Goldspink discusses the methodological implications of complex systems approaches to the modeling of social systems. Like others before him Goldspink advocates the use of bottom-up computer simulations (BUCSs) for examining social phenomena. It is argued therein that computer simulation offers a partial solution to the methodological crisis apparently observed in the social sciences. Though I agree with many of Goldspinkís remarks I personally feel that BUCS has been oversold as a tool for modeling and managing organizational complexity at the expense of other equally legitimate (from a complex systems stance) approaches. I have no doubt that BUCS offer a new and exciting lens on organizational complexity, but we must explicitly recognize that this nonlinear approach suffers from some of the same limitations as its linear predecessors. The aim of this short note is to discuss some of the limitations in more detail and suggest that complexity thinking offers a simulation paradigm that is broader than the new reductionism of BUCS. This alternative interpretation of complexity thinking forces us to reconsider the relationship between our models and "reality" as well as the role of simulation in decision making.
______________________
The Coherent Management of Complex Projects and the Potential Role of Group Decision Support Systems
Kurt A. Richardson, Michael Lissack, Andrew Tait, and Johan Roos
SysteMexico, ISSN:
NA,
2001,
2(1):
4-30
- ( PDF)
Abstract
None available
______________________
What is Complexity Science? A View from Different Directions
Kurt A. Richardson and Paul Cilliers
Emergence, ISSN:
1521-3250,
2001,
3(1):
5-22
- ( PDF)
Abstract
None available
______________________
Complexity Science: A 'Gray' Science for the 'Stuff in Between'
Kurt A. Richardson, Paul Cilliers and Michael Lissack
Emergence, ISSN:
1521-3250,
2001,
3(2):
6-18
- ( PDF)
Abstract
None available
______________________
Postmodernism Revisited? Complexity Science and the Study of Organizations
Kurt A. Richardson, Jacco van Uden and Paul Cilliers
Tamara: Journal of Critical Postmodern Organization Science, ISSN:
NA,
2001,
1(3):
53-67
- ( PDF)
Abstract
None available
______________________
Special Editors’ Introduction: What Is Complexity Science? A View from Different Directions
Kurt A. Richardson & Paul Cilliers
Emergence, ISSN:
1521-3250,
2001,
3(1):
5-23
- ( PDF)
Abstract
______________________
The Theory and Practice of Complexity Science: Epistemological Considerations for Military Operational Analysis
Kurt A. Richardson, Graham Mathieson, and Paul Cilliers
SysteMexico, ISSN:
NA,
2000,
1:
25-66
- ( PDF)
Abstract
Though postmodernist and complexity schools of thought are not new developments, their influence on operational analysis (OA), and in particular, military OA is recent. Independent of these developments, military OA is nonetheless changing as a result of the changing nature of warfare and the consequent demands on analysts. As an illustrative example consider the developing field of Operations Other Than War (OOTW). The scope of many OOTW-type problems suggests a holistic stance that not only requires analysis of the target societies physical assets, such as technological infrastructure, but also cultural features like the role of institutions, for example. These inter-subjective aspects are not adequately treated through the adoption of the traditional Modern, positivist, OA paradigm because of their local, rather than global, character. To fully appreciate the value of these ‘softer’ aspects analysts must begin by accepting the situatedness and personal interpretations of individuals’ surroundings. Though the longstanding and powerful reductionist viewpoint has been used to address these issues, it has been found to be lacking despite being stretched to the limits with novel application.
In addition to the changing subject matter the role of military OA is evolving. Now analysts are as likely to be asked to consider issues of organisational change as they are to be asked to model a force on force battle situation.
This paper will take the view that common to many of the new challenges facing analysts is the apparent compositional complexity of the systems of interest. As such, the pure adoption of a viewpoint that presumes the existence of an absolute, empirically based, and objective reality is increasingly inappropriate. The consequent paradigm shift has serious and far-reaching consequences for OA in general, yet is still commensurate with the traditional viewpoint. By not wanting to (and not needing to) undermine the extensive success of military OA over the past 50 years, the paper will also explore the symbiotic relationship between the traditional viewpoint and the emerging, postmodern, craft. The paper will rely on previous texts exploring postmodernism, hermeneutics, deconstruction, and social constructionism, and develop an epistemological view of the ‘science of partial complex systems’. Implications for military OA leading from these developments will be commented upon. In conclusion, the authors suggest that significant benefits might be realised through a reframing of the community’s dominant methodological position. Activities such as paradigmatic exploration and boundary critique have a central position in our revised OA perspective, and, rather than replacing existing methodologies, subsume them in a meta-methodological view of OA (i.e. a method for developing problem-specific methods).
|