The Impact of Complex Adaptive Systems Discussion
Order Instructions:
The Impact of Complex Adaptive Systems
As a teenager beginning a new school, you likely searched for other students who were similar to you to befriend. You may have looked for students with similar backgrounds, interests, hobbies, and academic abilities. It is likely that no one explicitly told you to do this but that you did it naturally. Others did likewise, and groups began to form. As your group began to interact with other groups, rules governing these relationships may also have formed. Again, these relationships were likely not instituted by anyone in formal authority but passed informally among members and between groups. However, some members may have deviated from these informal relationship rules. If the influence of these individuals were strong enough, they could permanently alter the relationships within and between groups.
Those who apply complexity theories suggest that organizations and even entire industries develop in much the same way as individuals or entire organizations pursue individual goals, react to the actions of others, and form relationships. Scholar-practitioners must ask themselves what implications these theories have for those attempting to develop strategy for modern organizations.
To prepare, review this Week’s Learning Resources on complexity theory. Consider the potential impact of a complex adaptive system for the organization you chose for your SSP.
By Day 5 of Week 5, read all of your colleagues’ posts and respond to two colleague’s individually in one of the following ways:
•Critique your colleagues’ analyses of how a small change in a system may lead to large or radical organizational transformation, and offer additional insight from your personal experience or the literature.
•Refute or support your colleagues’ analyses of the potential impact of complex adaptive systems on leadership using an example from your own experience or support from the literature.
•Refute or support your colleagues’ analyses of the potential impact of complex adaptive systems on innovation using an example from your own experience or support from the literature.
•Answer one of the questions posed by your colleagues in their posts.
Colleague post 1 (Geraldine)
The Impact of the Complex Adaptive Systems
Organizational strategic goals is set up by executing the traditional strategic thinking (“Strategy,” 2005). Many attributes exist within the organization that causes the inconsistent, unlink processes, and business units key relation disconnections. CAS acronyms stand for complex adaptive system. CAS defines how corporation classifies innovation, complex as living machine, and growing organization (Lucas, 2004) and describes as organizations compete with other and compete with other organizations in the same trade is a form as a complex system (Stacey, 2011). Scholars describe combination of a number; populations of entities called as agents, each behaves according to the define set of rules (Laureate Education, 2013; as cited by Stacey).
The Impact of Changes within a CAS
Organization carried out many changes by the force of the changing environment and advanced technology. Internal business units within CAS transform due to the communication and collaboration with other business units (Stacey). IBM has undergone many changes and transformed over the past 100 years. For example, the business focus transformed from a hardware product offering to product and services offering. IBM today has been committed as service oriented.
During the revolution, the organizational culture depends on their CM known as changes management to ensure the success of the project deliverables, while the IT industry will make significant transformations over time as well. IBM cultures innovative thinking, with that a great collaboration and communication, this attributes is one key for the technology enhancement and advancement, procedural and processes improvement.
Potential Impact of CAS on Leadership and Innovation
The organization creates innovative thinking culture; leader encourages employees on innovation and management uses technology and skills to advance processes and competitiveness (McCarthy, 2003). New product and services offering is a key differentiating themselves from another industry. IBM and Apple were the major company during the personal computers (PC) era. The product serves the same deliverables, although serves different types of entities. For instance, Apple was more focus with a graphical interface, whereas IBM focuses with a command line interface system. Microsoft dominated the PC operating system and transformed the PC by incorporating IBM, Apple, and other ideas.
Communicating with the agents within the CAS is the key, because if communication does not exist, then innovative thinking and technology advancement would not stimulate for driving the technological growth. Still true today, a greater collaboration and communication is still the key and continuously exercise. CAS more significant today than ever value, an innovation and flexibility must exist to be sustainable.
The question remains on whether the organization measure the results of these interactions attribute aligned with the leadership expectations (Laureate Education). What is the leadership perspective about the system complexity? What is the next big thing for PC? How quickly consumer adapt the advancement of PC? Any advice for IBM, Microsoft, or Apple?
References
Baran, M. (2010). Teaching multi-methodology research courses to doctoral students. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 4(1), 19-27. doi:10.5172/mra.2010.4.1.019
Fleming, L., & Sorenson, O. (2001). Technology as a complex adaptive system: evidence from patent data. Research Policy, 30(7), 1019-1039. Retrieved from https://www.funginstitute.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/Technology
Harvard Business School Press. (2005). Strategy: Create and implement the best strategy for your business. Boston, MA: Author
Hill, A., & Brown, S. (2007). Strategic profiling: a visual representation of internal strategic fit in service organisations.
International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 27(12), 1333-1361. doi:10.1108/01443570710835642.
IBM. (2014). About IBM. Retrieved from http://www.ibm.com
IBM Human Ability and Accessibility Center | Industries … (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www-03.ibm.com/able/industries/government/execbrief_beyond.html
Laureate Education (Producer). (2013). Analyzing complex adaptive systems [Video file]. Retrieved from https://class.waldenu.edu.
McCarthy, I. P. (2003). Technology management–a complex adaptive systems approach. International Journal of Technology Management, 25(8), 728-745. Retrieved from http://beedie.sfu.ca/profiles/IanMcCarthy
Colleague #2 post(Quintin)
The Impact of Complex Adaptive Systems
The field of complex adaptive systems theory (complexity) seeks to understand how order emerges in complex, markets, and social systems. High smith (2013) stated “complex adaptive systems provides an alternative to the linear, reductionist thinking that has ruled scientific thought since the time of Newton.” Complex adaptive systems theory maintains that the structure emerges from the interaction of individuals or a group. Successful business transformation has proven to be a complex issue. Cumming and Norberg (2013) stated, “In Darwin’s theory, it is commonly held that the evolution is a gradual process in which all species go through changes at regular intervals.”
Semetsky (2013) described CAS as a living system, which has several recurring conditions. The critical starting point from which the system enters into a presence at the edge of chaos is Disequilibrium. Semetsky described disequilibrium as being fluidity. Merriam-Webster defined fluidity as “the quality or state of being fluid and the physical property of a substance that enables it to flow.” Keyhani, Lévesque, and Madhok (2013) described disequilibrium as a “state in which old processes and strategies are disrupted.” Presence at the edge is an active state, which is a condition that allows old processes, structures, and customer to yield or try new approaches. Highsmith (2013) explained cultivation of self-organization and emergence are results of distributed intelligence. Systems achieve order because multiple local agents interact and those interactions produce unintended outcomes without the intervention of a central controller. Organizations take on properties and structures that are unexpected because people and groups. The most one can do to change and improve themselves is relative to what the other agents are doing (Bolman & Deal, 2013).
Highsmith (2013) described CAS’s as being characterized by perpetual novelty. In an economy, the agent may be an individual or household. Control of the CAS tends to be highly dispersed. A CAS has many levels of an organization with agents at levels servings as building blocks for agents at a higher level. A group of individual workers will produce a department; a group of departments will form a division, and will continue to build throughout the company and world economy. The systems processes are learning and adapting to changes in the system. The agents continuously throughout the process are exchanging information.
Alcock, Burgess, and Hasan (2013) described CAS’s as fluidly changing collections of distributed interacting components that react to both environmental and to one another. Examples of CAS’s include power grids, the internet, social groups, and human society. Power grid refers to the electrical grid that delivers electricity from suppliers to the consumers. The grid has stations that supply electricity to different areas and equipment. Power travels from the plant to the consumer to use for heating, lighting, sound, and refrigeration. Power failure can cripple plants, firms, airports and many other locations that require power. Power grids that cease to operate can cause broad hardships. Devices that need power can stop operating until powers restored. People can die from extreme cold or excessive heat, and the economy could suffer billions of dollars in damage.
Bullock et al. (2014) described how leaders of organizations expect to achieve stability by reducing complexity through codification, solving problems using reductionist rather than holistic thinking, understanding critical cause and linkages, and engaging in complex planning for a world they believe is predictable. Thus, leaders cannot control the future because, in complex systems such as organizations, unpredictable internal dynamics will determine future conditions. Heylighen (2013) described how leaders have learned the importance of interactions, correlation, and unpredictability among individuals. Leaders facilitate communications, but they do not direct communication. The leader allows communication to emerge through linear processes. Involved leaders facilitate development by becoming catalysts for actions, and function as “tags” Tags help speed up specific behaviors by directing attention to what is important and providing meaning to events.
Collins, Fizzanty, and Russell (2013) described that collaboration with other leaders in other areas is important to reduce problems within the organization. Collaborative members suggest that a shift in power relates to change and emergence of new patterns of interactions. Leaders can have available a list of occurrences that can happen and ways to solve the problems. Each leader or agent can have control of their station during any problems within the system. Leaders have to be flexible and recognize change has to occur. The fix used yesterday may not work with the same issue today. Schneider (2012) described leadership as an indirect, catalytic process that facilitates productive self-organization, a movement in which activity reformulates around a common cause.
Examples of CAS include the ecosystems and the biosphere. At the global level, the homeostatic nature of processes crucial to the maintenance of life, especially atmospheric processes which treat the biosphere. Another example of CAS is power companies. Power companies provide power to millions of customer all over the US. When part of the grid goes bad, if not properly corrected, power loss could affect millions of customers. The dispersed and local nature of an autonomous selection process assures continual adaptation.
Leaders cannot predict the future; can leaders use models to give them an idea of what could happen in the complex adaptive systems related to their organization?
A complex system has the ability “to switch between different modes of behavior as the environmental conditions are varied.” It is adaptive. What would be the outcome of a complex adaptive system that makes the incorrect decision/malfunction. Example: Medical equipment used to sustain life.
References:
Alcock, C., Burgess, L., & Hasan, H. (2013). Information systems for the social well-being of
senior Australians in building sustainable information systems (pp. 89-100). New York,
NY: Springer.
Bolman, L., & Deal, T. (2013). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Bullock, J., Colombo, D., Linkov, I., Seager, T., Sweet, D., Tylock, S., & Unrath, U. (2014). Sustainability awareness and expertise: Structuring the cognitive processes for solving wicked problems and achieving an adaptive state. Retrieved from doi: 10.1007/978-94- 007-7161-1_5
Please answer each colleague post individually with three references each !!!!!
SAMPLE ANSWER
The Impact of Complex Adaptive Systems
Colleague One
In response to the post made by the first colleague, Geraldine, I agree with him that each and every organization has strategic goals, which are executed through strategic thinking. Nonetheless, there arises the need to specify that modern organizations have fostered the application of complex adaptive systems by reinforcing their operations. Given the definition of the term Complex Adaptive Systems, which Geraldine notes as being the process of classifying complex living machines and innovations so as to stimulate growth in organizations, the example given on the PC industry adds a different perspective to the argument. This is because even though the industry was shaped by the existence of competitors who impacted on the micro environment through innovations, research and development, it is still appreciated that the slotting in of strategic managers, market researchers and public relation officers facilitated the integration of CAS (Hill & Brown, 2007). In the end, the complexity of the relationship between Apple, IBM and other companies led to a transformation of the industry where currently, companies that were previously specialized in software programming such as Microsoft have ventured into hardware production through mergers and takeovers while hardware producing companies such as IBM have vertically integrated into software programming.
From this example, the impact of CAS is seen as having a neutralizing impact on the growth of the PC industry as all the companies have vertically integrated. This critique moves the argument closer to answering the questions posed by Geraldine asking whether organizations have a way of measuring the results accrued from an interaction of the adaptive systems. The answer to this question is yes. This is because the inauguration of various departments into modern organizations facilitate the identification of key parameters that cause an impact on the adaptive systems (Solvit, 2012). Additionally, the leadership perspective has increased thus necessitating the creation of specific departments to monitor the efficiency of the system. As a result, the next big thing for PC is further vertical integration where companies will be self-sufficient by creating their own software and hardware respectively (Hobbs & Scheepers, 2010). The consumer are very adaptive because the increased competition courtesy of CAS has led to more sophisticated innovations at a relatively low cost. I would advise Apple, Microsoft and IBM to invest more in research and development so as to create more user friendly PCs.
References
Hill, A. & Brown, S. (2007). Strategic profiling: a visual representation of internal strategic fit in service organizations. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 27(12), 1333-1361.
Hobbs, G. & Scheepers, R. (2010). Agility in Information Systems: Enabling Capabilities for the IT Function. Pacific Asia Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 2 (4).
Solvit, S. (2012). Dimensions of War: Understanding War as a Complex Adaptive System. Paris, France: L’Harmattan Press.
Colleague Two
The second colleague (Quintin) acknowledges that the complex adaptive system theory defines the process of attaining order in complex markets and social systems. I support the definition of the theory since it seconds the ideas by Alcock, Burgess & Hasan (2013), who identified that CAS is pertinent in integrating complex business ideas. A critique of this note is that the author identifies more with many disciplines that skip the main logic behind the application of the theory in modern business scenarios. In spite of the scattered ideas, the author acknowledges that CAS is likely to result into distributed intelligence. By so doing, the systems attain order by interacting with the agents and this results into unintended outcome. In my opinion, which is seconded by Bronder and Pritzi, (2012) the central controller guides the reaction of the various stakeholders thus their outcome becomes focused towards using the integrated system to maximize on profitability and returns realized from a business. The process of gaining from applying the CAS theory is advanced by the institution of a learning organization where the employees are motivated into learning new skills that will help in shaping the company into adapting to the new systems. An example of this complex adaptations is seen in the technological advancement of medical equipment and machinery which rises the need for hospitals to create learning environments where their medics can interact with the macro environment through social networks and communication (Holland, 2006). By so doing, a cohesive system is created by borrowing knowledge from other better performing systems.
References
Alcock, C., Burgess, L., & Hasan, H. (2013). Information systems for the social well-being of senior Australians in building sustainable information systems (pp. 89-100). New York: Springer Press.
Bronder, C. & Pritzi, R. (2012). Developing Strategic Alliances: A Conceptual Framework for Successful Co-operation. European Management Journal, 10 (4), pp. 412-421.
Holland, H. (2006). Studying Complex Adaptive Systems. Journal of Systems Science and Complexity, 19 (1), 1-8. http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/41486
We can write this or a similar paper for you! Simply fill the order form!
