KARMAŞIKLIK PARADİGMASI IŞIĞINDA ÖRGÜT TEORİLERİNİN YENİDEN DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ

Year 2016, Issue: 35, 49 - 63, 01.02.2016

Gökben Bayramoğlu

Abstract

1700’lü yıllardan günümüze kadar geçerli olan Newtoncu paradigma ile dünya tıpkı bir saat gibi işleyen bir makine gibi açıklanmaktadır. Bu paradigma ile dünya belirli kurallara göre işleyen doğrusal, öngörülebilir ve tanımlanabilir neden-sonuç ilişkilerine dayalı olarak açıklamaktadır. Bu paradigma sosyal bilimlerde ve organizasyon yapılarının oluşturulmasında da temel teşkil etmiştir. Newtoncu paradigmaya göre tasarlanmış organizasyonlarda yaşıyoruz ve çalışıyoruz. Ancak bu paradigma, günümüzün karmaşık, uyum sağlayıcı ve evrimleşen organizasyon dinamiklerini açıklamada yetersiz kalmaktadır. Son 30 yılda, dünya ekonomisi “makine” tabanlı Newtoncu-Kartezyen düşünce yapısından “bilgi” çevresel faktörlere dayalı tabanlı bir düşünce yapısına dönüşmüştür. Bu dönüşüm insanlık açısından büyük bir önem taşımaktadır. Karmaşıklık teorisi, sistemin parçaları arasındaki etkileşim sonuçlarına bağlı olarak karmaşık sistemlerdeki ilişkilerin doğrusal olmayan ve tahmin edilemeyen bir nitelik taşıdığını ifade etmektedir. Günümüz yöneticileri, sürekli değişen çevre ve belirsizlikle mücadelede güçlükler yaşamaktadır. Örgüt teorisi, yöneticilere bu sorunların üstesinden gelebilmeleri için bir bakış açısı kazandırması açısından büyük bir önem taşımaktadır. Örgütsel teorinin evrimini inceleyerek yöneticiler, organizasyonlarının karşı karşıya olduğu sorunlara daha iyi çözümler bulabilecektir. Karmaşıklık teorisi, yönetim ve organizasyon literatürüne 1980’li yılların sonlarından itibaren girmeye başlamıştır. Karmaşıklık teorisi, örgüt teorisyenleri için ilgi çekici birçok konu içermektedir. Karmaşıklık teorisi, örgüt teorisyenlerini cezbeden yeni bir bakış açısı, analitik yöntemler ve kavramsal bir çerçeve sunmaktadır. Bu teori, basit doğrusal ilişkilerin oldukça karmaşık ve önceden öngörülemez davranışlara neden olabileceğini ve bu nedenle şaşırtıcı düzen ve örnekler sunmaktadır. Aynı zamanda organizasyonların çevrelerine nasıl uyum sağlayacağına, örgütsel uyum ve popülasyon ekolojisi hakkında farklı iki görüşün sentezini sunmaktadır. Yayınlanan literatür sayısı artmakla birlikte bu alandaki temel eksiklik geleneksel örgüt teorisi basit teori ile yeni doğan, paradoksal ve karmaşık yapıları karmaşıklık teorisi arasında köprü kurmaya yardımcı olacak teorik çalışmaların yetersizliğidir. Bu bağlantının kurulması, organizasyonların nasıl işlev gördüğüne ilişkin bir bakış açısı kazanılması ve nasıl başarılı olacağının anlaşılması açısından önem taşımaktadır. Bu makalede söz konusu bağlantının kurulması ve karmaşıklık paradigmasına geçişin organizasyonlar açısından öneminin ortaya konması amaçlanmaktadır.

Keywords

Karmaşıklık Teorisi, Kaos, Doğrusal Olmayan Dinamikler, Örgüt Teorisi

Re-Evaluation Of Organization Theories In Light Of The Paradigm Of Complexity

Abstract

Newtonian paradigm, prevalent from 1700th to present, explains the world is a well-behaved machine like a clock. According to this paradigm, the world depends upon certain rules, fundamentally predictable and identifiable cause-effect relationship. This paradigm has also served as the basis for the creation of social sciences and organizational structure. It can be, therefore, claimed that we live and work in organizations designed accordingly the Newtonian paradigm. However, this paradigm is inadequate in explaining the dynamics of today’s complex, adaptive and evolving organizations. In the last 30 years, the world economy, "machine" based Newtonian-Cartesian mindset has become "knowledge" based on environmental factors. This change is quite significant in terms of humanity. Complexity theory suggests that relationship in complex systems show nonlinear and unpredictable characteristics due to results of the interaction between the components of the system. Managers struggle with complexity and uncertainty surrounding the constantly changing environment. Today managers can easily overcome the problems that hinder the achievement of the organizational goals by investigating the evolution of organizational theory. Complexity theory has been examined in management and organization literature since the late 1980s. Complexity theory contains several important issues which are of interest to organizational theorist. Complexity theory suggests a new insights, analytical methods, and conceptual frameworks that have attracted many organizational theorists in recent years. It offers that simple deterministic relationships can cause highly complex and frequently unpredictable behavior, and thus this complexity can still exhibit surprising order and patterns. It introduces a synthesis of two different perspectives on how organizations adapt to their environments, organizational adaptation and population ecology. Although the number of papers on this context has boosted so far, one of the main deficiency in literature is the lack of a theoretical framework that would serve as a bridge between traditional notion of theory building simple theory and paradoxical, and complex approaches complex theory . Formatting this connection is crucial to obtain perspective that allows us to understand how organizations function, and how can succeed. The main objective of this paper is to set up mentioned link and to emphasize the importance of the paradigm of complexity for organizations

Keywords

Complexity Theory, Chaos, Non-linear Dynamics, Organizational Theory

References

• Aaltonen, M., Barth, T., Casti, J.L., Mitleton-Kelly Eve., Sanders T.I, Complexity as Sense Making Framework, Helsinki:Finland Future Research Center, 2005.
• Amagoh, F., (2008). “Perspectives on Organizational Change: Systems and Complexity Theories”, The Innovation Journal: The Public Sector Innovation Journal, 13(3), p:1-14.
• Anderson, P., (1999). “Complexity Theory and Organization Science”, Organization Science, Vol:10, No:3, May-June, p:216-232.
• Ball, P., Why Society is a Complex Matter: Meeting Twenty-first Century Challenges, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelber, 2012.
• Barton, S., (1994). “Chaos, Self-Organization and Psychology”, American Psychologist, vol:49, no:1, January, p:5-14
• Beabout, B.R., (2010). Urban School Reform and the Strange Attractor of Low-Risk Relationships”, School Community Journal, 20 (1), p:9-30.
• Bennet, Alex ve Bennet, David. A New Theory of the Firm: Organizational Survival in the New World, Burlington: Elsevier, 2004.
• Bennet, A., Bennet D. A New Theory of the Firm: Organizational Survival in the New World. The Intelligent Complex Adaptive Systems, Knowledge Management Consortium International Press, Butterworth-Heinemann, 2003.
• Bennis, Warren Gabriel, (1967). “Revizyonist Theory of Leadership”, Harvard Business Review, Jan-Feb.
• Boccaletti S., Grebogi C. Lai Y.C., Mancini H. ve Maza D., (2000). “The Control of Chaos: Theory and Applications”, Physics Reports, 329, p:103-197.
• Bright, Jim E.H. ve Pryor, Robert G.L. (2011). “the Caos Theory of Careers”, Journal of Employment Counseling, Vol:48, December.
• Buchanan, M. (2004). “Power Laws & the New Science of Complexity Management”, Strategy&Leadership, Spring, Issue:34.
• Burgelman, R.A. ve Grove A.S., (2007). “Let Chaos Reıgn, Then Reın in Chaos_Repeatedly: Managing Strategic Dynamics For Corporate Longevity”, Strategic Management Journal, 28, p:965-979.
• Burnes, B. (2005). “Complexity Theories and Organizational Change” International Journal of Management Reviews, 7(2), June, pp: 73-90.
• Collier, J. ve Esteban, R. (1999). “Governance in the Participative Organization: Freedom, Creativity and Ethics”, Journal of Business Ethics, 21, p: 173-188.
• Cooksey, R.W. (2001). What Is Complexity Science? A Contextually Grounded Tapestry of Systemic Dynamism, Paradigm Diversity, Theoretical Eclectism and Organizational Learning”, Emergence, Vol:3, No:1, p:77-103.
• Dankwa, J.O. ve Julian, S.D. (2001). “Complexiftying Organizational Theory: Illustrations Using Time Research”, Academy of Management Review, Vol: 26, No:3, p: 415-430.
• Drazin, R. ve Van De Ven A.H. (1985). “Alternative Forms of Fit in Contingency Theory”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol:30, No:4, December, pp:514-539.
• Drucker, P.F, Fırtınalı Dönemlerde Yönetim, Çeviren: Bülent TOKSÖZ, Inkılap Kitapevi, İstanbul,1998.
• Durlauf, S. (1997). “What Should Policymakers Know about Economic Complexity”, [Erişim Tarihi: 05.11.2014].
• Eijnatten, F.M. (2004). Chaos and Complexity: An Overview of the “New Science” in Organization and Management, Draft for Revue Sciences De Gestion Quarterly, English Editon, Vol:1.
• Espejo, Raul. Social Systems and the Embodiment of Organizational Learning”, Complex Systems and Evolutionary Perspectives on Organizations: The Application of Complexity Theory to Organizations, Eve Mitleton-Kelly, Pergamon, 2003.
• Farazmand, A. (2003). “Chaos and Transformation Theories: A Theoretical Analysis with Implications for Organization Theory and Public Management”, Public Organization Review: A Global Journal, vol:3, p: 339-372.
• Filipe, Jose Antonio., Ferreira Manuel Albertı M, Coelho, Manuel, Pedra A. I. C., ve Andrade, M. (2010). “Analyzing Fisheries Management Through Complexity and Chaos Theories Framework”, Journal of Mathematics and Technology, April, p: 5-12.
• Flood Robert L. ve Carson, Ewart. Dealing with Complexity: An Introduction to the Theory and Application of Systems Science, New York:Springer, 1998.
• Frear, D. (2010). “The Effect of Change on Management Planning: Applying Chaos Theory”, International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(14), p:57-60.
• Garmston R. ve Wellman, B.(1995). “Adaptive Schools: In a Quantum Universe”, Educational Leadership, April, Vol:52, no:7, p: 6-12.
• Gershenson, Carlos. Design and Control of Self-Organizing System Facing Complexity with Adaptation and Self-Organization, LAP Academic Publishing, Mexico City, 2007.
• Gill, Stephan Jill. The Manager’s Pocket Guide to Organizational Learning, HRD Press, 2000.
• Gleick, James. Kaos: Yeni Bir Bilim Teorisi, Fikret Üçcan (Çev), İstanbul: Tubitak Popüler Bilim Kitapları, 1995.
• Handy, Charles. Ruhun Arayışı: Kapitalizmin Ötesi- Modern Dünyada Amaç Arayışı, Çev: Nurettin ElHüseyni, Boyner Holding Yayınları, Mart, İstanbul, 1998.
• Harvey, David. ve L., Reed, M. (2004). “Social Science as the Study of Complex Systems”, Chaos Theory in the Social Sciences: Foundation and Applications, USA: University of Michigan.
• Heylighen, Francis, Cilliers, Paul ve Gershenson, Carlos. “Complexity and Philosophy”, Complexity, Science and Society, Radcliffe, Oxford, 2007.
• Horn, J. (2008). “Human Research and Complexity Theory”, Educational Philosophy and Theory, Vol: 40, No:1, p:130-143.
• Jackson, Micheal C. Systems Thinking: Creative Holism for Managers, England:John Wiley&Sons LTD, The Attium, 2003.
• Kellert, Stephen H., Borrowed Knowledge Chaos Theory and the Challenge of Learning across Diciplines, Chicago: The University of Chicago, 2008.
• King J.B. (1989). “Confronting Chaos”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol: 8, p:39-50.
• Klerk Johan De (2012) “Running Head: Management Process, Linear and Nonlinear Management, Ordinary and Extraordinary Management, Rational Managemeny, Chaos Theory, Management-from Rational Management to Chaos Theory”, http://ssrn.com/abstract=2015332 [Erişim tarihi: 20/06/2015].
• Koçel, Tamer. İşletme Yöneticiliği, genişletilmiş 15. Baskı, Beta Yayınları, İstanbul, 2010.
• Kotler, Philip ve Caslione John A. (2009). Kaos Yönetimi, Çev: Kıvanç Dündar, Optimist Yayınları, İstanbul
• Liang T. Y. (2013).“Edge of Emergence, Relativistic Complexity and The New Leadership”, Human Systems Management, Vol:32, p:3-15.
• Lin, Winston T. ve Shao Benjamin B.M. (2000). “The Relationship Between User Participation and System Success: A Simultaneous Contingency Approach”, Information&Management, Vol: 37, p:283-295.
• Lissack, Micheal ve Roos, Johan. The Next Common Sense: Mastering Corporate Complexity Through Coherence, Nicholas Brealey Publishing, London, 1999.
• Maciariello Joseph. Yönetim: Peter Drucker, Çev: İlker Gülfidan Drucker 100. Yıl Kitaplığı, Nisan, İstanbul, 2009.
• Manson S.M. (2001). “Simplifying Complexity: A Review of Complexity Theory”, Geoforum,Vol:32, p:405-414.
• Mathews, K. Micheal, White, Micheal C. ve Long, Rebeca G. (1999) “Why Study the Complexity Sciences in the Social Sciences?, Human Relations, Vol: 52, No:4, p:439-462.
• McDonald J.R. (2009). “Complexity Science: an Alternative Word View for Understanding Sustainable Tourism Development” Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 17 (4), July, p: 455-471.
• Mckelvey, B. (2004). Toward a Complexity Science of Entrepreneurship Journal of Business Venturing, Vol:19, p: 313-341.
• McKelvey, Bill (2004). “Complexity Science as Order-Creation Science: New Theory, New Method, E:CO, Vol:6, No:4, p:2-27.
• Merry, U. (2000). “The Information Age, New Science and Organizations”, Emergence a Journal of Complexity Issues in Organizations and Management, 2(3), p:19-40.
• Mililiken, F.J. (1987). “Three Types of Perceived Uncertainty about the Environment-State”, The Academy of Management Review, Vol:12, Issue:12, January, pp:133-143.
• Morgan, Gareth. (1990). “Paradigm Diversity in Organizational Research”, The Theory and Philosophy of Organizations: Critical Issues and New Perspectives, ed: John Hassard, Denis Pym, Psychology Press.
• Murphy, P. (1996). “Chaos Theory as a Model for Managing Issues and Crises”, Public Relations Reviews, Vol: 22, No:2, Summer, p: 95-113.
• Nguyen, Huu Le ve Kock, S. (2011). “Managing SMEs’ Survival from Financial Crisis in a Transition Economy: a Chaos Theory Approach”, Journal of General Management, Vol:37, No:1, September, p: 31-45 .
• Nonaka, I. (1988). “Creating Organizational Order Out of Chaos: Self-Renewal in Japanese Firms”, California Management Review, Spring, vol:30, Issue:3.
• Parker, David ve Stacey, Ralph. Chaos, Management and Economics: The İmplications of Non-Lineer Thinking, The Institute of Economic Affairs, London:Profile Books, 2007.
• Pellisier Rene (2012). “A Proposed Frame of Reference for Complexity Management as Opposed to the Established Linear Management Strategies”, International Journal of Organizational Innovation, vol:5, Num:2 Fall, p:6-68.
• Reigeluth, Charles M. Chaos Theory and the Science of Complexity: Foundations for Transforming Education, Systems Thinkers in Action: A Field for Effective Change Leadership in Education, New York:Rowman&Littlefield, 2008.
• Salazar, Espinosa ve Walker, John. A Complexity Approach to Sustainability: Theory and Application in World Scientific Series on Complexity Science, London, Imperial College Press, 2011
• Sardar, Ziaddin ve Abrams Iwona. Introducing Chaos, UK: Icon, 1998.
• Schindehutte, M. ve Morris, Michael H. (2009). “Advancing Strategic Entrepreneurship Research: The Role of Complexity Science in Shifting the Paradigm”, Business&Society, Vol:33, Issue:1, p: 241-276.
• Senge, Peter M., Beşinci Disiplin: Öğrenen Organizasyon Sanatı ve Uygulaması, Çeviren: Ayşegül İldeniz-Ahmet Doğukan-Barış Pala, Genişletilmiş 16. Baskı, Yapı Kredi Yayınları, İstanbul, Aralık, 2013.
• Shelton, Charlotte. D. ve Darling John. R. (2004). “From Chaos to Order: Exploring New Frontiers in Conflict Management”, Organization Development Journal, Fall, Vol:22, Issue:3, p:22-41.
• Show, Patricia. Changing Conversation in Organization: A Complexity Approach to Change, Complexity and Emergence in Organization Series, 2002.
• Slethaug Gordon E., Beautiful Chaos: Chaos Theory and Metahaotics in Recent American Fiction, Albany: State University of New York Press, 2000.
• Smith Aaron C.T., (2004). “Complexity Theory as a Practical Management Tool: A Critical Evaluation”, Organization Management Journal, 1(2), p:91-106.
• Stacey, Ralph. Strategic Management and Organizational Dynamics: The Challenge of Complexity, Fifth Edition, England: Prentice Hall, 2007.
• Sterman, John D. (1994). “Learning in and about Complex System”, System Dynamics Review”, Vol:10, No:2-3, Summer-Fall, p:291-330.
• Sterman, John D. Business Dynamics Systems Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World, Irwin McGraw Hill, 2000.
• Tasaka, H. (1999). “Twenty-first-century Management and the Complexity Paradigm”, Emergence, Vol:1, No:4, p:115-123.
• Tetenbaum, Toby J. (1998). “Shifting Paradigms: From Newton to Chaos”, Organizational Dynamics, Spring, p:21-32.
• Tiplady [Erişim tarihi: 09. 07. 2015].
• Walby, Sylvia (2007). “Complexity Theory, Systems Theory and Multiple Intersecting Social Inequalities”, Philosophy of the Social Science, Vol:37, no:4, December, p:449-470.
• Warfield, John. N. (1999). “Twenty Laws of Complexity: Science Applicable in Organizations”, Systems Research and Behavioral Science, vol:16, p:3-40.
• Warning, Stephen P. (1992). “Peter Drucker, MBO and the Corporatist Critique of Scientific Management”, A Mental Revolution Scientific Management since Taylor, Edited by Daniel Nelson, Ohio State University.
• Wheatley, Margaret J. Leadership and the New Science: Discovering Order in a Chaotic World, second ed., San Francisco: Berrett –Koehler, 1997.
• Yang, Chun-Xia., Liu Han-Min. ve Wang Xing-Xiu (2013). “Organization Theories: From Classical to Modern”, Journal of Applied Sciences, 14(21), p:4470-4476.
• Yang, Chun-Xia., Liu Han-Min. ve Wang Xing-Xiu, (2013). “From the Old Paradigm to Complexity Paradigm: The Evolution of Organization Theory”, Advances in Information Science and Service Sciences (AISS), Vol:5, No:9, May, p:591-599.
• Yick, Liang Thow, Organizing Around Intelligence: The New Paradigm, World Scientific Publishing Company, 2009.