Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Complexity Theory for a New Managerial Paradigm: A Research Framework

  • Chapter
Neostrategic Management

Part of the book series: Contributions to Management Science ((MANAGEMENT SC.))

Abstract

In this work, we supply a theoretical framework of how organizations can embed complexity management and sustainable development into their policies and actions. The proposed framework may lead to a new management paradigm, attempting to link the main concepts of complexity theory, change management, knowledge management, sustainable development, and cybernetics. We highlight how the processes of organizational change have occurred as a result of the move to adapt to the changes in the various global and international business environments and how this transformation has led to the shift toward the present innovation economy. We also point how organizational change needs to deal with sustainability, so that the change may be consistent with present needs, without compromising the future.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Alexander, C. P. (1983, May 30). The new economy. Time, 62–70. Retrieved April 2014, from: http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,926013,00.html.

  • Antonelli, C. (2003). The economics of innovation, new technologies and structural change. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Argyris, C. (1998). Teaching smart people how to learn. In P. F. Drucker (Ed.), Harvard business review on knowledge management (pp. 81–108). Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong, M. (2009). Armstrong’s handbook of management and leadership: A guide to managing the results. London: Kogan Page.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aßländer, M. S., & Brink, A. (2008). Begründung korporativer Verantwortung: Normenkonkretion als Prozess. In G. A. Scherer & M. Patzer (Eds.), Betriebswirtschaftslehre und Unternehmensethik. Wiesbaden: Gabler.

    Google Scholar 

  • Autry, W. C., Goldsby, J. T., & Bell, E. J. (2013). Global macro trends and their impact on supply chain management. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Auyang, S. Y. (2003). Foundations of complex-system theories: In economics, evolutionary biology, and statistical physics. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Avery, G. C., & Bergsteiner, H. (2011a). Sustainable leadership: Honeybee & Locust approaches. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Avery, G. C., & Bergsteiner, H. (2011b). How BMW successfully practices sustainable leadership principles. Strategy & Leadership, 39(6), 11–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, K. D. (2006). Sociocybernetics and social entropy theory. Kybernetes, 35(3/4), 375–384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barbier, E. B. (1987). The concept of sustainable economic development. Environmental Conservation, 14(02), 101–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bauman, Z. (2000). Liquid modernity. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beer, S. (1972). Brain of the firm. London: The Penguin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bertoncelj, A., Kovac, D., & Bertoncel, R. (2009). Success factors and competencies in organisational evolution. Kybernetes, 38(9), 1508–1517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bertot, C. J., Jaeger, T. P., & Hansen, D. (2012). The impact of policies on government social media usage: Issues, challenges, and recommendations. Government Information Quarterly, 29(1), 30–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bisson, P., Stephenson, E., & Vigurie, S. P. (2010). The global grid. http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/innovation/the_global_grid

  • Boatright, J. R. (2007). Ethics and the conduct of business. New York: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonini, S. (2012). The business of sustainability. McKinsey on Sustainability & Resource Productivity, 96–105. Retrieved March 2014, from: https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/McKinsey/dotcom/client_service/Sustainability/PDFs/McK%20on%20SRP/SRP_11_Biz%20sustainability.ashx

  • Boons, F., Montalvo, C., Quist, J., & Wagner, M. (2013). Sustainable innovation business models and economic performance: An overview. Journal of Cleaner Production, 45, 1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boulding, K. E. (1956). General systems theory – the skeleton of science. Management Science, 2(3), 197–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brinkley, I. (2006). Defining the knowledge economy: Knowledge economy programme report. London: The Work Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke, P. (2012). A social history of knowledge, II. From the Encyclopédie to Wikipedia. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrion-Cepeda, G. (2006). Competitive advantage of knowledge management. In D. G. Schwartz (Ed.), Encyclopedia of knowledge management (pp. 34–43). London: Idea Group.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A., & Buchholtz, A. (2014). Business and society: Ethics, sustainability, and stakeholder management. Stamford: Cengage Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Certo, S. C. (2000). Modern management: Quality, ethics, and the global environment. New York: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chan, P. S., Pollard, D., & Chuo, S. (2007). Corporate ethics: China vs. USA. International Business & Economics Research Journal, 6, 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christopher Houghton, B. (2011). Finance at the threshold: Rethinking the real and financial economies. Farnham: Gower Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, M. (1999). Commentary on the organization science special issue on complexity. Organization Science, 10(3), 373–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2004). Good business: Leadership, flow, and the making of meaning. New York: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • De George, R. (1990). Business ethics. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deresky, H. (2003). International management: Managing across borders and cultures. New York: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Devinney, T. M., Midgley, F. D., & Cristine, W. S. (2005). Knowledge creation in organisations: A multiple study overview. In J. Davis, E. Subrahmanian, & A. Westerberg (Eds.), Knowledge management: Organizational and technological dimensions (pp. 77–125). Heidelberg: Physica.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Dominici, G. (2008). Holonic production system to obtain flexibility for customer satisfaction. Journal of Service Science and Management, 1(3), 251–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dominici, G. (2012). Consulting of the XXI century. Coping with complex business systems. Nuova Atlantide, 3, 69–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dominici, G., & Palumbo, F. (2013). Decoding the Japanese lean production system according to a viable systems perspective. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 26(2), 153–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Easterby-Smith, M., Thorp, R., & Lowe, A. (2002). Management research. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elkington, J. (1999). Triple bottom-line reporting: Looking for balance. Australian CPA, 69(2), 18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elliott Dupuy, P. J. (1986). The autonomy of social reality: On the contribution of systems theory to the theory of society. In E. L. Khalil & K. E. Boulding (Eds.), Evolution, order and complexity. An introduction to sustainable development. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emerson, T. (2001). Mystery sold. Newsweek Magazine. Accessed 15 February, 2007, from http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2001/01/28/mystery-solved.html

  • Espejo, R., & Reyes, A. (2011). Organizational systems: Managing complexity with the viable system model. Berlin: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2011). Communication from the commission to the European parliament, the council, the European economic and social committee and the committee of the regions. A renewed EU strategy 2011–14 for Corporate Social Responsibility. Accessed August 18, 2014, from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2011:0681:FIN:EN:PDF

  • Firat, F., Dholakia, N., & Venkatesh, A. (1995). Marketing in a postmodern world. European Journal of Marketing, 29(1), 40–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frederick, C. W., Davis, K., & Post, E. J. (1988). Business and society: Corporate strategy, public policy, and ethic. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goessl, L. (2010). What is a high-performance organization (HPO)? Accessed August 16, 2014, from http://www.helium.com/items/802036-what-is-a-high-performance-organization-hpo

  • Golinelli, G. M. (2010). Viable systems approach (VSA). Padua: Cedam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant, A. M., Campbell, E. M., Chen, G., Cottone, K., Lapedis, D., & Lee, K. (2007). Impact and the art of motivation maintenance: The effects of contact with beneficiaries on persistence behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 103(1), 53–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gresov, C., & Drazin, R. (1997). Equifinality: Functional equivalence in organization design. Academy of Management Review, 22(2), 403–428.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatch, M. J. (2012). Organization theory: Modern, symbolic and postmodern perspectives. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, K. T. (2010). Scandal beneath the financial crisis: Getting a view from a moral-cultural mental model. Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, 33, 735.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media. Business Horizons, 53(1), 59–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, S. R., & Mikes, A. (2012). Managing risks: A new framework. Harvard Business Review, 90(6), 49–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keyes, R. (2004). The post-truth era: Dishonesty and deception in contemporary life. New York: St. Martin’s Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kieser, A., & Kubicek, H. (1992). Organisation. Berlin: De Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuula, M., Putkiranta, A., & Toivanen, J. (2012). Coping with the change: A longitudinal study into the changing manufacturing practices. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 32(2), 106–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laszlo, E. (1972). Introduction to systems philosophy: Toward a new paradigm of contemporary thought. New York: Gordon and Breach Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, N. (1986). The autopoiesis of social systems. In F. Geyer & J. van der Zouwen (Eds.), Sociocybernetic paradoxes (pp. 172–192). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, N. (1989). Ecological communication. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, N. (1995). Social systems. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lynch, D., & Kordis, P. (1988). Strategy of the dolphin: Scoring a win in a chaotic world. New York: William Morrow.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merry, U. (1995). Coping with uncertainty: Insights from the new sciences of chaos, self organization and complexity. Westport: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mikulecky, D. C. (2010). A new approach to the theory of management: Manage the real complex system, not its model. Cybernetics and systems theory in management: Tools, views, and advancements. Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montalto, F., Behr, C., Alfredo, K., Wolf, M., Arye, M., & Walsh, M. (2012). Rapid assessment of the cost-effectiveness of low impact development for CSO control. Landscape and Urban Planning, 82(3), 117–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mulej, M., & Potocan, V. (2007). Requisite holism – precondition of reliable business information. Kybernetes, 36(3/4), 319–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ny, H., Hallstedt, S., & Ericson, A. (2013). A strategic approach for sustainable product service system development. In A. Chakrabarti (Ed.), CIRP design 2012 (pp. 427–436). London: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • O’Dell, C., & Hubert, C. (2011). The new edge in knowledge: How knowledge management is changing the way we do business. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • ORG ISO. (2013). ISO in 2013. Accessed August 20, 2014, from Http://www.iso.org/iso/home/about/annual_report-2013.html

  • Pagano, U., & Rossi, A. M. (2009). The crash of the knowledge economy. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 33(4), 665–683.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Panayotou, T. (2013). Instruments of change: Motivating and financing sustainable development. Oxon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearce, D., Barbier, E., & Markandya, A. (2013). Sustainable development: Economics and environment in the Third World. Stamford, CT: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perry, G., Goodwin, N., Peck, E., & Freeman, T. (2006). Managing networks of twenty-first century organisations. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pirsch, J., Gupta, S., & Grau, S. L. (2007). A framework for understanding corporate social responsibility programs as a continuum: An exploratory study. Journal of Business Ethics, 70(2), 125–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2002). The competitive advantage of corporate philanthropy. Harvard Business Review, 80(12), 56–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Potocan, V., & Mulej, M. (2003). On requisitely holistic understanding of sustainable development from business viewpoints. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 16(6), 421–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramus, C. A. (2002). Encouraging innovative environmental actions: What companies and managers must do? Journal of World Business, 37(2), 151–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rice, A. L. (2013). The enterprise and its environment: A system theory of management organization. Oxon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roblek, V. (2011). Knowledge management and fluctuation in technology parks. Master Thesis, University of Primorska, Koper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roblek, V., Pejić Bach, M., MeÅ¡ko, M., & Bertoncelj, A. (2013). The impact of social media to value added in knowledge-based industries. Kybernetes, 42(4), 554–568.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross, G., & Ross, J. (1997). Measuring your company’s intellectual performance. Long Range Planning, 30(3), 413–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schermerhorn, J. R., Hunt, G. J., & Osborn, N. R. (2002). Organizational behavior. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, M. S., & Carroll, A. B. (2003). Corporate social responsibility: A three-domain approach. Business Ethics Quarterly, 13, 503–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sekerka, L. E., & Stimel, D. (2011). How durable is sustainable enterprise? Ecological sustainability meets the reality of tough economic times. Business Horizons, 54(2), 115–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stacey, R. D., Griffin, D., & Shaw, P. (2000). Complexity and management: Fad or radical challenge to systems thinking? London: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Staehle, W. H. (1991). Management. Munchen: Verlag F. Vahler.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiglitz, J. (2006). Chancen der Globalisierung. München: Siedler.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoner, J. A. F., & Freeman, E. (1992). Management. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teisman, G. R. (2005). Public management on the edge of chaos and order; about leadership and organizing in complexity. The Hague: Academic Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tetenbaum, T. J. (1998). Shifting paradigms: From Newton to chaos. Organizational Dynamics, 26(4), 21–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uhl-Bien, M., Marion, R., & McKelvey, B. (2007). Complexity leadership theory: Shifting leadership from the industrial age to the knowledge era. The Leadership Quarterly, 18(4), 298–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Usrey, K. B. (2007). Ethics in a globalized world – What have we wrought?! International Business & Economics Research Journal, 6, 41–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Valacich, J., & Schneider, C. (2012). Information systems today: Managing in the digital world. New York: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Valentinov, V. (2014). The complexity–sustainability trade – Off in Niklas Luhmann’s social systems theory. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 31(1), 14–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Kleef, J. A. G., & Roome, N. J. (2007). Developing capabilities and competence for sustainable business management as innovation: A research agenda. Journal of Cleaner Production, 15(1), 38–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Tulder, R., Kolk, A., & Van Wijk, J. (2009). From chain liability to chain responsibility: MNE approaches to implement safety and health codes in international supply chains. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(2), 399–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Tulder, R., & Van der Zwart, A. (2006). International business-society management: Linking corporate responsibility and globalization. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Villalba, E. (2006). The uniqueness of knowledge management in small companies: Managing knowledge as an employer strategy for lifelong learning. Stockholm: US–AB.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Bertalanffy, L. (1951). General system theory; a new approach to unity of science. Problems of general system theory. Human Biology, 23(4), 302–312.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Bertalanffy, L. (1973). General system theory: Foundations, development, applications. New York: George Braziller (Rev. Ed.).

    Google Scholar 

  • Walters, D. (2004). New economy–new business models–new approaches. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 34(3–4), 219–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiener, N. (1948). Cybernetics. Paris: Hermann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiener, N. (1965). Cybernetics or control and communication in the animal and the machine. Cambridge, MA: MIT press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winn, I. M., Kirchgeorg, M., Griffiths, A., Linnenluecke, K. M., & Günther, E. (2010). Impacts from climate change on organizations: A conceptual foundation. Business Strategy and the Environment, 20, 157–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Business Council for Sustainable Development. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: Meeting changing expectations. Geneva: World Business Council for Sustainable Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Report of the world commission on environment and development: Our common future. Accessed August 19, 2014, from http://www.un-documents.net/ourcommon-future.pdf

  • Yang, C.-L., Lin, S.-P., Chan, Y.-H., & Sheu, C. (2010). Mediated effect of environmental management on manufacturing competitiveness: An empirical study. International Journal of Production Economics, 123(1), 210–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, C.-L., & Sheu, C. (2007). Achieving supply chain environment management: An exploratory study. International Journal of Technology Management, 40(1), 131–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zelizer, V. A. (2007). Ethics in the economy. Zeitschrift für Wirtschafts und Unternehmensethik, 8(1), 8–23.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department SEAS, Polytechnic School, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy

    Gandolfo Dominici

  2. Business Systems Laboratory, Avellino, Italy

    Gandolfo Dominici

  3. Faculty of Management, University of Primorska, Koper, Slovenia

    Vasja Roblek

Authors
  1. Gandolfo Dominici
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Vasja Roblek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gandolfo Dominici .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Economics and Business Economics, University of Dubrovnik, Dubrovnik, Croatia

    Ivona Vrdoljak Raguž

  2. Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia

    Najla Podrug

  3. Faculty of Economics, University of Rijeka, Rijeka, Croatia

    Lara Jelenc

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Dominici, G., Roblek, V. (2016). Complexity Theory for a New Managerial Paradigm: A Research Framework. In: Vrdoljak Raguž, I., Podrug, N., Jelenc, L. (eds) Neostrategic Management. Contributions to Management Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18185-1_14

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation