Complexity science and leadershipThe theory of complexity has compelled a thorough re-examination of leadership. This is because much of the theory of leadership used today has been developed using the General Systems Theory (GST). Leadership is an important process in the self-organization. Although this is the case, there s needs to examine the leadership in a closed system and how this leadership is similar to leadership in open systems. In the GST-Open Systems, there is a definition that is offered by Katz and Kahn (1978) leadership is regarded as an incremental influence of others with direction, which has some routine.
Their definition depicts leadership to be having similarities and differences between open systems and closed systems. With complexity theory, leadership is regarded to be an influence above others and follows routine compliance. The difference that is found is in the process of leadership. Whereas closed systems do not rely so much on the formal structures of authority. It is indeed true that leadership is independent of the structures of authority. This is attributed to the fact that it has an effect on the process of emergence.
Organizations, which are based on complexity science, argue that the goals of organizations should be established with a view of looking at the whole system. Leaders who focus on complexity theory will from time to time work on budgets and encourage relationships, which are provocative in nature. An example is that the leaders who think together will from time to time have ideas from the different systems that have been integrated together. The different systems will come up with ideas and leaders will have to integrate all these ideas to get one meaning out of it.
Complexity theory suggests that the organization that is in question should be able to look at the systems that make the whole organization. The different parts of the organization should be analyzed so that the different parts, which are varying, will be looked into so that there is more understanding of these different parts. The solution of a difficult process can be achieved from flexible and simple rules, which are commonly called minimum specifications. Although this is the case, most leaders today believe that progress plans must be in a position to give the best way, which is specified in detail and which is implemented consistently in the same level of detail across the board.
Although this is the case, the method fails to take advantage of the innovative talent, which is found in an organization. It also does not allow the predictability of events. There are four things that are provided by the Minimum specifications and which emergence of complex behaviors can be seen. These four things include direction pointing, permissions, resources and boundaries.
In the case of leadership of a hospital, there will be the meeting and the dialogue of the leaders so that they discuss of the minimum specifications so that systems can move forward. For many centuries, organizational leadership was based on top down authority whereby the elements involved are treated solely. Due to globalization and technological revolution, organizations are becoming more complex and competitive thus for its survival, fast production of knowledge and innovation is an essential to the leaders. Complexity science guides leaders into the process of solving organization’s complexity challenges and a framework to accommodate change within the organization.
The understanding of complexity science enables the leaders to observe the behavior of large collections of simple, interacting units endowed with potential to evolve in future.