How the Understanding of Complexity Leaders Aids Leaders - Essay Example

How the understanding of complexity leaders aids leaders Introduction A deeper understanding of the key concepts embedded in complexity science generates an understanding about the dynamics and processes of change that are found in various biological and physical phenomena. Complexity science is described as a collection of prepositions, principles and ideas, most of which have been shaped by other fields of knowledge. It addresses characteristics of the living systems that are understated or neglected in the traditional approaches. It is apparent that most of the challenges that we face in the contemporary world have been largely influenced by the escalating complexities (Westley et al., 2006). For instance, the continuing innovations in information and communication technology are enlarging the scope and connectivity of the current engineered systems. However, managing the resulting complexity is major challenge for many industries and governments (Chapman, 2004). In essence, the whole concept of complexity is not new, but what is considered new is the fact that contemporary leaders are required to make informed decisions in the faster paced world, and increase adaptability to turmoil, globalization and knowledge breakthroughs (Warner, 2000). Furthermore, increased attention is now focusing on how complexity can enable leaders and researchers understand and control economic, political and social phenomena. Such efforts are directed towards ensuring leaders realize the importance of complexity science and how this can be applied when it comes to change management (Westley et al., 2006). This paper seeks to explore and provide an explanation of the key concepts of complexity science, illustrating the reasons why complexity science is important, and demonstrates how an understanding of complexity science aids leaders. The paper seeks to enhance the understanding about organization and leadership. Key concepts of complexity science Complexity science is viewed as a multi-disciplinary subject encompassing subjects such as biology, social science and industrial applications. However, mathematical modeling and development approaches from physics can be applied to provide a better understanding concerning these systems (Cutler, 2002). Complexity science describes a set of concepts, propositions, principles and ideas that have appeared and clustered together from the beginning of the twentieth century (Gribbin, 2004). It is not a distinct theory, but incorporates more than just one theoretical framework. It is highly interdisciplinary, looking for explanations about fundamental issues concerning changeable systems, adaptations and living (Flynn Research, 2003). However, concepts of complexity science are classified into three sets. The first concept covers complexity and systems, and applies concepts such as interconnectedness and interdependence within the aspects and dimensions of a system. Gribbin (2004) highlights that complexity is based on interconnections that occur between the simple parts, which in turn make up the whole system. Change is influenced by the feedback processes, and emerges from the interaction of parts in that; the whole change is attributed to the changes that have taken place in the parts. Feedbacks are vital to the manner in which systems operate, and change in one element of the system always alters the whole system. The second set of concepts regards complexity and change. Complexity in this case is described as nonlinear since it is disproportionate and unpredictable. Feedback processes taking place within the interconnected elements generate relationships that view change as being nonlinear, dynamic and unpredictable. This change is termed as being sensitive to initial conditions such that small differences in a system’s initial state may lead to considerable changes at a later stage. It is also apparent that complex system exhibit random behaviour and this is often described as chaos and edge of chaos. The last set of concepts regards complexity and agency, which describes the notion of adaptive agents and the manner in which their behaviours are evident in complex systems. For instance, co-evolution explains how co-evolution takes place within the system of adaptive agents leading to the evolution of both the overall system and the agents. The specific form of emergent properties that take place within systems of adaptive agents is known as self-organization (Hemelrijk, 2005). Principles of complexity science Complexity science is characterized by numerous principles since this is a broad and multi-disciplinary subject affecting various dimensions and elements of life (Mittleton-Kelly, 2003). A few of the principles will be discussed in this paper. The first principle is connectivity and interdependence. In most cases, complex behaviour emerges from interaction, inter-relationships and inter-connectivity of the aspects of a system and its environment. Taking in this to a human perspective, it would be taken to mean that an individual’s decision or actions might affect other individuals and system. However, the impact will not be the same and might vary from one individual to the other at a time. Connectivity concerns the relatedness between social systems. According to the complexity theory, claims that the high connectivity entails a high interdependence degree (Rihani, 2005). The other principle is co-evolution, which not only applies to elements that are found within a system, but also applies to related systems that are found within the ecosystem. The manner in which elements influence and are in turn influenced by the other elements existing within the ecosystem is part of the co-evolution process. It is important to note that in the process of co-evolution, one of the entities or domains partially depends on the evolution of the other existing entities or domains, or it can be viewed in this context, in that one entity or domain alters the context of the others. In essence, co-evolution lays significant importance on the evolution of interactions and reciprocal evolution (Mittleton-Kelly, 2003). Another principle is that of dissipative structures, which explains the manner in which open systems exchange matter, information or energy with their surrounding. However, when these systems are pushed far from equilibrium, they produce new structures and order. Non-equilibrium may enable the system to evade thermal disorder and change a portion of the energy communicated from the surrounding into a new dissipative structure that contains multiple choices and symmetry breaking (Mittleton-Kelly, 2003). Feedback is another principle of complexity science, and was previously recognized in terms of either positive or negative feedback systems. Positive feedback, also known as reinforcing, seeks to drive change, while a negative feedback, also identified as balancing, dampening or moderating seeks to maintain a system’s stability. For instance, in far from equilibrium situations, nonlinear relationships often reign, making a system to become sensitive to the external effects. Fewer inputs generate tremendous effects that make the whole system reorganize. This is therefore known as reinforcing or positive feedback. Actually, very small fluctuations or perturbations can result in gigantic and tremendous structure breaking waves in far from equilibrium conditions (Mittleton-Kelly, 2003). Another principle is chaos and complexity. It is postulated that when a system changes from a more orderly state to a disorganized one, it may undergo a transition phase that involves the emergence of new patterns of order from the disorder, resulting in a paradox of order where order co-exists with disorder (Mittleton-Kelly, 2003). How the understanding of complexity leaders aids leaders The contemporary society is experiencing exceptional structural shifts in the economy as a result of the revolutions in the communication and the computation technologies. A new type of economy, known as the connected economy has emerged, which rivals the reign of the industrial revolution and the manner in which business transactions are conducted (Flynn Research, 2003). Due to such changes, the world has found itself in the mix of revolutionary change. Previously, companies had a view that they were their own maters of destiny, but this has greatly changed in today’s connected economy, since companies are finding themselves to be interdependent players in a vacillating and fluid economic web, since their fate is highly affected by the behaviour of the other members in the industry (Chesters, 2004). However, this change is escalating an unprecedented speed, driven by the globalization of businesses, technological innovation and the adoption of the internet with newer technologies such as electronic commerce. Companies today, more than ever are resorting into partnerships and mergers as a way of doing effective business, which clearly illustrates the essence of connected economy (Urry, 2003). Consequently, business leaders are also concerned about this change, looking for the best and appropriate ways of responding to the contemporary changes (Marion, and Uhl-Bien, 2001). In fact, most of the leaders are finding their existing business strategies and models inappropriate and inadequate to dealing with the contemporary business world. For instance, those leaders that used to apply the Tayloresque mechanistic model that was predicated on predictability, control and linear thinking, are now opting for the nonlinear model where there is limited control and inability to predict the future of the business (Sanders and McCabe, 2003). On the other hand, science is considered as the most important precursor of that change. The world was previously viewed as mechanistic and linear; since the simple cause and effect matters were expected clarify the complex incidents of nature, but today, scientists have realized that the world is organic and nonlinear, characterized by unpredictability and uncertainty (Rihani, 2002). Leaders are also accepting the fact that world is has transformed and become complex and organic. More and more leaders are getting interested in exploring newer ideas that will enable them thrive in the contemporary world. It is apparent that changes are taking place everywhere, the existing systems are becoming inefficient in dealing with this change, and therefore, modern ways have to be devised and implemented to be able to deal with this change (Pina e Cunha and Vieira da Cunha, 2006). Importance of complexity science to leaders Studies indicate that, the amplified challenges and demands of the 21st century lie in its increasing complexity (Adami, 2002). In fact, the complexity phenomenon is not new-fangled, what is fresh is that, the leaders must make certain decisions and in a faster-paced globe. In addition, they must argument their adaptability to globalization, turbulence, and knowledge breakthroughs (mostly applicable in evidenced-based health practice) (Nadia, 2004). Complexity science offers individuals an approach that focuses beyond apparent structures and implies that, goals and resources be efficiently allocated, taking in to contemplation the entire system instead of allocating them in portions. In the contemporary society, an understanding of complexity science is assisting leaders in different ways that are vital in the growth of the organizations. Actually, different organizations are becoming increasingly aware of the new approaches of complexity science and its benefits, and the fact that, old science which includes traditional approaches to engineering and design are falling short in keeping up with the amplifying challenges of the modern society ((Vinod, 2010). The results of complexity science may be used for more productive, more natural, more innovative and enjoyable outcomes in managing individuals, organizations and societies. Most individuals are attracted to complexity science as it offers a more accurate perception of reality, while others are drawn to it as they have found through experience that, most traditional strategic planning strategies are unsatisfactorily as they do not offer an efficient method of managing individuals and duties in an environment of constant modifications (complexity) on every day basis (Graeme, 2008). Therefore, we can conclude in this point that, a good understanding of complexity science is essential as it helps leaders in management which as a result yields positive results which are essential in all organizations. How an organization is managed determines its achievement of its goals and objectives. Leading- edge organizations including international manufactures, advertising agencies, and service organizations such as hospitals have evidenced that, the most important principles of complexity science have assisted in increasing efficiency while coping with the rapid complexity at the same time, making full employment of human creativity. According to most individuals, complexity science will turn out to be the principal form of organizations in the current century. For instance, use of ICT in organizations has helped them in discovering a number of things concerning the real world (Bullock, 2004). These have practical applications for management, community, business, and economic development. Technology have discovered profound properties of order and structure, and life norms which imply powerful ways by which companies can merge, progress and flourish in the ever more complex technological-economic environment or the community in which such an organization operates. The science of complexity deals with order ad structure, particularly in living systems including social organizations, patterns of evolution, embryo development and nonprofit organizations and businesses, and how they interact with technological economic milieu (Furusawa and Kaneko, 2000). An understanding of complexity science by leaders will therefore enable them to use and keep up to date with new technologies which will enhance the advancement of their organizations (Edwin and Glenda, 2001). In the contemporary society, organizations are competing in all areas and good leadership with the necessary skills and knowledge is what organizations are looking for in order to have a competitive advantage over their rivals which will assist them in attaining their set objectives. Complexity science is very applicable in service industries such as medical institutions. The increased modifications of health care systems is motivating institutional leaders and the clinicians to create regional and local systems that are effective in offering high quality and cost effective healthcare. Having the knowledge of complexity science assists the institutional leaders in establishing strategies which helps in improving the ways in which patients are managed (Brenda et al, 1998). Recently, both administrative and clinical leaders of hospitals and group practices are pursuing techniques that support high-value operational systems (Brenda et al, 1998). Modern management practices in medical institutions take the perception that, a well functioning system is comparable to a machine, a mechanical device that is well oiled. Nevertheless, due to the rising number of interdependence and interactions of health care determinants, medical systems follows complex nonlinear models instead of simple linear models like those of machines. According to Nadia (2004), the health care determinants usually operate using complex processes, thus health programmers must adopt new techniques that include critical parameters so that they can advance and plan better their interventions. Through learning and understanding, valuing and managing complexity science at various levels, health care leaders, will be able to develop better insights that assist them in responding to health systems issues. In addition, the leaders will acquire the necessary skills which will help them in establishing more efficient management techniques for the health institution. In the health care centers, most leaders are interested in complexity science as a result of frustrations of using traditional methods. These leaders did not trust most of the management techniques they were practicing and they believed that, complexity science could relief them from their current stress and suggest options for fresh interventions and methods of interacting in a leadership responsibility. Modern management faces various predicaments, the basic one being the fact that, the mechanical way of individuals views is grained in the perception of everyday’s organization making it hard to organize in other ways. The phenomenon of complexity science promises new approaches, and new methods of understanding various situations that leaders face in every day life, while its language mirrors nature and life (Jan and Robert, 2007). According to research, complex adaptive systems (CAS), found in complex science are kind of systems that are composed of networking agents depicted in terms of rules (Ahmed et al, 2005). According to John Holland, the founder of complexity, these agents are different in both capability and form and they adapt by modifying their rules and therefore, behavior with time. Complex adaptive systems are found in immune systems, ecological systems, the brain, and in the internet. Understanding complexity science in this situation will therefore assist leaders in obtaining new procedures and methods which will allow them modify the organizational structures in the best ways possible and also help them in dealing with difficult situations that occur in everyday doings. It is true that, the disturbance of equilibrium challenges organizations and encourages modifications. Some of the general characteristics of complex adaptive systems include natural and social science. Social science encompasses self organization, connectivity, feedback, interdependence, emergence and increasing returns, while natural science includes evolutionary biology, self generation, and the chaos theory (McShea, 1991). Leaders should understand that organizations are complex adaptive systems meaning that, they are like living organisms that tend to fluctuate from static to chaotic states (Jacco, 2004). Chaotic state in an organization occurs when tradition methods necessitates to be broken and replaced with new systems, while static state is when the organizational environment is certain (Holland, 1999). Studies have proved that, leadership and management practices that are steered by complexity science centers on associations which results in to human orientation of the place of work. Human oriented procedures give authenticity to the entire area of human centered management. Complexity science offers leaders with a human oriented management practice that emerges from science, newness (Juarrero, 2000). Therefore, management that is guided by the key principles of complexity science constitutes a style that is human oriented. This means that, it makes out that; associations are the bottom line of an organization and that, culture, productivity and creativity emerges from such relationships. Human centered procedure to management is not novel in that some parts of it exist in various forms in many companies. The novelty exists whereby; complexity science offers a scientific basis as to why the aspect of the practice of human oriented management is successful and the underlying principle under which this approach should be undertaken. Thus, it is evident that, in order to develop human oriented management practices, leaders should have knowledge of complexity science. Conclusion This paper gives readers an understanding of complexity science and how it can aid leaders in their day-to-day responsibilities. An understanding of complexity science, which is a collection of different theories and a study of adaptive systems, is very essential for leaders especially in the contemporary society. According to the essay, the key principles of complexity science, which includes connectivity, feedback, interdependence and dissipative structures among others, are very significant and have assisted in increasing efficiency while coping with the rapid complexity. Complexity science has been evidenced as a vital phenomenon in management. It is clear that, the outcomes of complexity science may be used for more productive, more natural, more innovative and enjoyable results in managing individuals, organizations and societies. Most individuals are attracted to complexity science as it offers a more accurate perception of reality, while others are drawn to it as they have found through experience that, most traditional strategic planning strategies are unsatisfactorily as they do not offer an efficient method of managing individuals and duties in an environment of constant modifications (Vinod, 2010). Organizational leaders and managers can be able to build sustainable systems due to their capability to live. Living communities, organizations, healthcare systems are significant due to our interest in adaptability and sustainability. References Adami, C. 2002. "What is complexity?". Bioessays, 24 (12), 1085–94. Ahmed, E. Elgazzar, AS. and Hegazi AS. 2005. "An overview of complex adaptive systems". Mansoura J. Math 32: 6059. Brenda, Z., Curt, L, and Paul, P .1998. Lessons from Complexity Science for Health Care Leaders, Dallas, TX: VHA Inc. Bullock, S. C 2004. Complexity and Emergent Behaviour in ICT Systems. New York, Hewlett-Packard Labs. Chapman, J., 2004. System Failure: Why Governments Must Learn to Think Differently, London: Demos. Chesters, G., 2004. ‘Global Complexity and Global Civil Society’, Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations 15. Cutler, R., 2002. ‘Complexity Science and Knowledge-Creation in International Relations Theory’ in Encyclopedia of Institutional and Infrastructural Resources in Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems, Oxford: Eolss Publishers for UNESCO. Edwin, E. O. and Glenda, H. E. 2001. Facilitating Organization Change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Flynn Research 2003. Complexity Science: A Conceptual Framework for Making Connections, Denver: Flynn Research. Furusawa, C. and Kaneko, K. 2000. "Origin of complexity in multicellular organisms". Phys. Rev. Lett. 84 (26), 6130–6133. Graeme, D. S. 2008. "A general theory of complex living systems: Exploring the demand side of dynamics", Complexity, 13, (6). Gribbin, J., 2004. Deep Simplicity: Chaos, Complexity and the Emergence of Life, London: Allen La Hemelrijk, C. (ed.) 2005. Self-organization and Evolution of Biological and Social Systems, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Holland, J. H. 1999. Emergence: from chaos to order, Mass: Perseus Books. Holland, J. H. 2006. "Studying Complex Adaptive Systems." Journal of Systems Science and Complexity, 19 (1), 1-8. Jacco, V. 2004. Organisation and Complexity: Using Complexity Science to Theorise Organizational Aliveness. London, Universal-Publishers. Jan, B and Robert, G. 2007. Complexity, science and society. Oxford, Radcliffe Publishing. Juarrero, A. 2000. Dynamics in Action: Intentional behaviour as a complex system. Cambridge, MIT Press. Marion, R. and Uhl-Bien, M. 2001. ‘Leadership in Complex Organizations’, Leadership Quarterly 12(4): 389–418. McShea, D. 1991. "Complexity and evolution: What everybody knows". Biology and Philosophy 6 (3): 303–24. Mittleton-Kelly, E. 2003. ‘Ten Principles of Complexity and Enabling Infrastructures’ in Complex systems and Evolutionary Perspectives of Organisations: The Application of Complexity Theory to organizations, London: Elsevier Press. Nadia, H. 2004. Insights from Complexity Science for Health Care Leaders. Journal of Public Health Management & Practice, 10 (4), 373 – 373. Pina e Cunha, M. and Vieira da Cunha, J. 2006. ‘Towards a Complexity Theory of Strategy’, Management Decision 44(7). Rihani, S. 2002. Complex Systems Theory and Development Practice: Understanding Non-linear Realities, London: Zed Books. Rihani, S. 2005. ‘Complexity Theory: A New Framework for Development is in the Offing’, Progress in Development Studies 5(1). Sanders, I. and McCabe, J.A. 2003. The Use of Complexity Science: A Survey of Federal Departments and Agencies, Private Foundations, Universities and Independent Education and Research Centres, Washington, DC: Washington Centre for Complexity and Public Policy. Urry, J. 2003. Global Complexity, Cambridge: Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Vinod, W. 2010. Complexity Science. New York, Lap Lambert Academic Publishing. Warner, M. 2000. Complex Problems … Negotiated Solutions: The Practical Applications of Chaos and Complexity Theory to Community-based Natural Resource Management, London: ODI. Westley, F., Zimmerman, B. and Quinn Patton, M. 2006. Getting to Maybe: How the World is Changed, Toronto: Random House. Read More