No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
Displacing the paradox of decision-making: The management of contingency in the modernization of a Danish county
... They detect a tendency to "tame" paradox when identifying general types that dis-embed paradoxes from their specific spatial and temporal context and that treat them as stable entities (Clegg, Vieira da Cunha, & Pina e Cunha, 2002). The paradox lens then overlooks the dynamics within paradox (Pina e Cunha & Putnam, 2017), its transforming and shifting (Knudsen, 2005). ...
... For a theory like SST organizing is an ongoing process of responding to paradox, or a so-called continued deparadoxification (Knudsen, 2005). Deparadoxification means that an interaction on an issue might trigger the construction of paradox by organizational members. ...
... Irrespective of the actual observation of contradictory tensions responses can supplement, replace or overlay the initially observed tensions with alternatives through the use of references (Andersen, 2003). These alternatives transform an initial contradictory tension, while triggering other issues that might surface with another paradox (Beech et al., 2004;Knudsen, 2005). Thus, SST argues that "deparadoxification happens through the development of paradoxes" (Andersen, 2003: 249). ...
How can we grasp the dynamics of paradox? To address this question we elaborate on a strong process view of social systems theory following a distinction between endogenous and exogenous approaches to paradox. The former tends to treat paradox as a stable entity by locating paradox in the organizational structures and by inducing a managerial approach, based on paradoxical thinking. An endogenous approach like social systems theory situates paradox in the local interactions of present events, and thereby within. This endogenous approach highlights the dynamics within paradox by arguing that paradox emerges and subsides in events like moments of interactions, and that paradox develops and transforms over time. In comparison, an exogenous approach implies paradox to be stable so that it serves to explain the dynamics in organizing.
... 491f.). SST assumes that organizations are inherently paradoxical and hence continuously visibilize and invisibilize paradoxes to avoid blockage (Knudsen, 2005;Nassehi, 2005;Schoeneborn, 2011). As in the paradox lens (Smith & Lewis, 2011), visibilizing means indicating perceived tensions, thereby making paradox a topic in a specific interaction. ...
... Organizations consist of moments of interaction and endure over time (Luhmann, 2000). SST explores how organizations handle this inherent paradox without self-destructing (Knudsen, 2005). Organizations are 'fundamentally rooted in local interaction' (Schoeneborn, 2011, p. 668) and SST highlights organizing in the moment (Hernes, 2008): 'they [organizations] exist only at the moment an operation is actually taking place' (Luhmann, 2005, p. 87). ...
... 'Raising the issue' occurs mainly through factual references, which introduce the issue to board interactions (see Andersen, 2003;Knudsen, 2005). 'Raising the issue' opens up or invites contingency into interaction (Vásquez, Schoeneborn, & Sergi, 2016). ...
Studies on organizational paradoxes often explain paradox salience exogenously, as a state of latency awaiting detection. Based on social systems theory, this process study develops an explanation of paradox salience and latency beyond an actor’s cognitive ability to think paradoxically. Such an explanation lies endogenously within the interactions of actors coping with paradox. Analysing the discussions of a hospital executive board during a change initiative reveals how factual, social and temporal references surface and submerge contradictory tensions. The proposed model for visibilizing and invisibilizing paradox explains salience and latency – even if individuals are aware of paradox – as integral to coping with paradox. As a paradox invisibilizes in an interaction it resurfaces somewhere along the line and thereby transforms within an organization.
... This is the background of Robert Klitgaard's (1988) famous formula of the causes of corruption: 'corruption = monopoly + discretion -accountability'. From this follows that corruption is mainly a consequence of weak monitoring and that anti-corruption programs should entail an organizational design that is based on a rather strict notion of transparency, accountability, and compliance. ...
... The second pillar is what Rose-Ackerman and Truex (2012: 22ff) and Rose-Ackerman (1999) call 'program redesign' to reduce corrupt opportunities. In line with Klitgaard's (1988) abovementioned formula, this aspect of anti-corruption is directly targeted at organizational design of public institutions and basically means reducing the discretion 3 and monopoly of bureaucratic decision-making and stating rules for public officials as clearly as possible 4 . ...
... Baecker, 1999;Luhmann, 2000), but left the strictly functionalist paradigm and replaced it with a focus on autopoietic decision-making. In this concept, however, questions of rule-following, deviance, formality, and informality do not play the prominent roles they used to do in a functionalist framework, though some researchers made considerable efforts in explaining limits, paradoxes, and the informality of organizational decision-making within Luhmann's later perspective (Knudsen, 2006;Knudsen, 2012). ...
... It was striking how the organization in the period studied emerged as an ever greater network of recursively connected decisions. The organization made still more decisions about more and more (see also Knudsen 2004Knudsen , 2005. Moreover, it was remarkable how the decisions in the county increasingly referred to other decisions in the county and less and less to legislation, circulars and the like. ...
... Deparadoxization occurs as one displaces the paradox from the decision to the premise for the decision. But it may also be done in different ways -as can be seen in Frederiksborg County Health Authority (see Knudsen 2005 for a more detailed analysis of displacements and the effects of them). In Frederiksborg County Health Authority we may observe a series of displacements routinely used when decisions are made. ...
Zusammenfassung
Der Beitrag zeigt, wie die von Niklas Luhmann entwickelte Systemtheorie für eine empirische Analyse von Lärm und lärmerzeugenden Mechanismen geöffnet werden kann. Die dem Artikel zugrunde liegende analytische Strategie ist die Beobachtung der Operationen, die ein soziales System konstituieren. Eine entsprechende Analyse macht auf das Fehlen von Anschlusskommunikation und auf die aktive Produktion von Lärm (verstanden als Operationen ohne Anschlüsse) aufmerksam, d. h. sie öffnet die Analyse für systemische Autolysis (Selbstauflösung). Darauf aufbauend wird eine operationale Analyse organisationaler Kommunikation durchgeführt, die die Leitdifferenz Ereignis/Rekursivität benutzt. Der Artikel ist in sechs Abschnitte gegliedert. Nach der Einleitung wird eine operational-analytische Strategie skizziert (I). Danach wird das Konzept der Autolysis vorgestellt (II). Eine Fallstudie über das Entscheidungsverhalten in einer Organisation des Gesundheitswesens liefert dann Beispiele für organisationalen Lärm im Sinne von Entscheidungen ohne Anschlusskommunikationen (III). Die Fallstudie demonstriert eine aktive Produktion von Geräuschen und identifiziert vier Mechanismen, die ein Rauschen erzeugen (IV). Danach wird diskutiert, wie die Organisation den Lärm beobachtet, den sie erzeugt (V). Abschließend werden die Resultate einer Zusammenführung der operational-analytischen Zugangsweise und des Konzepts der Autolysis identifiziert und weiterführende Perspektiven skizziert.
... Because of that, if decision communications are to be successfully completed, particular communicative provisions are required. Luhmann, in this regard, speaks of the necessity of 'deparadoxification' of the decision paradox, which involves concealing the decision's paradoxical form (Åkerstrøm Andersen, 2003;Knudsen, 2005;Luhmann, 2005b;Schoeneborn, 2011). The organization has several mechanisms of deparadoxification in place: the first one is operative closure on the basis of decisions; that is to say, the organization totalizes decisions as the only legitimate form of communication. ...
... Another stream of research, which relates particularly to Luhmann's later work, applies his theory to the management of public sector organizations. The primarily empirical studies of this subgroup describe, among other things, the emergence of new forms of health care organizations as a result of an attempt to deal with paradoxical decisions in health care management (Knudsen, 2005;la Cour & Højlund, 2008); other studies use his theory to explain the problems that arise when new payment schemes are introduced in public management because of the clash between different societal codes that apply in the communication about the payment schemes (Rennison, 2007). Another stream of research draws on Luhmann's theory in order to study the organization of open-source software development projects. ...
... Such a perspective highlights the institutional complexity and the presence of multiple logics in the plan process (Høiland and Klemsdal, 2020). The navigation and legitimization by managers correspond to a central issue recognized in organizational theory: how organizations handle the contingency of decisions and paradoxes in decision-making processes (Knudsen, 2006;Jansson et al., 2021). ...
Purpose
As part of a national plan to govern professional and organizational development in Norwegian specialist healthcare, the country’s hospital clinics are tasked with constructing development plans. Using the development plan as a case, the paper analyzes how managers navigate and legitimize the planning process among central actors and deals with the contingency of decisions in such strategy work.
Design/methodology/approach
This study applies a qualitative research design using a case study method. The material consists of public documents, observations and single interviews, covering the process of constructing a development plan at the clinical level.
Findings
The findings suggest that the development plan was shaped through a multilevel translation process consisting of different contending rationalities. At the clinical level, the management had difficulties in legitimizing the process. The underlying tension between top-down and bottom-up steering challenged involvement and made it difficult to manage the contingency of decisions.
Practical implications
The findings are relevant to public sector managers working on strategy documents and policymakers identifying challenges that might hinder the fulfillment of political intentions.
Originality/value
This paper draws on a case from Norway; however, the findings are of general interest. The study contributes to the academic discussion on how to consider both the health authorities’ perspective and the organizational perspective to understand the manager’s role in handling the contingency of decisions and managing paradoxes in the decision-making process.
... Hahn and Knight (2019) argue that paradoxes are socially constructed and inherent in organisational systems. Authors like Seidl et al. (2021) and Knudsen (2006) follow Luhmann (2018Luhmann ( , 2006Luhmann ( , 1999 in emphasising that paradox is not just inherent in but essentially constitutive of organisations. Luhmann's approach conceptualises organisations as decision-making systems rooted in the inescapable paradox that "only those questions that are in principle undecidable, we can decide" (von Foerster, 1992, 14). ...
This study investigates how sharing ventures address the paradox of doing good versus doing harm in their strategic decision-making. The doing good versus doing harm paradox refers to the difficulty of sharing ventures to balance the aim to benefit society and the environment while minimizing potential adverse effects. Understanding and addressing this paradox is crucial for promoting sustainable and responsible decision-making. Our thematic content analysis of 38 in-depth interviews with founders and senior managers of sharing ventures in four European countries finds that these ventures align along three distinct value focus types in their decision- making and use five mechanisms to conceal paradoxes related to balancing social/environmental and economic contradictions. By surfacing the importance of sharing ventures’ value focus and resultant mechanisms to deparadoxify, our findings provide insights into organisational paradox and the sharing economy, specifically the purposeful concealment of paradox as a counterintuitive choice for remaining actionable in decision contexts.
... It can displace the paradox of a decision to its decision premises, 7 it can displace it to a decision maker (and thus ascribe intentions), by means of hearings it can displace it to the hearing partners. It can also deparadoxify the decision by interpreting it as a necessary answer to environmental development, thus displacing the paradox to developments in the environment (see Luhmann, 2000a;Andersen, 2003c;Knudsen, 2005). ...
In Niklas Luhmann’s theoretical architecture, difference comes before identity. This basic theoretical decision finds many expressions with the most fundamental one being the definition of a system as the difference between the system and its environment. It is a theoretical decision which makes relations in need of explanation, as they cannot be taken for granted. This chapter is about the relation between decision-making organizational systems and code-based function systems. The point of departure is the contention that Luhmann’s conceptualization of this relation not only is theoretically inconsistent but also makes it difficult to observe new developments in the relation between organizations and function systems. The purpose of the chapter is to reinterpret the conceptualization of the relation between organizational and function system in a way that makes the theory able to observe historical and current changes in this relation.
... Managers are often able to work around the paradox by acting as if their justifications were somehow real. The fiction of acting-as-ifjustifications-existed temporalizes the paradox and pushes it into the future (Knudsen, 2005;Czarniawska, 2005). Understood in this way, strategic plans, visions, and longterm objectives are excuses for actions, allowing managers to bypass double contingency and hence make the underlying paradox less visible. ...
Niklas Luhmann’s theory of social systems is based on two revolutionary ideas:
firstly, that the social world should be conceptualized as consisting of nothing but
communications; and secondly, that communications are produced not by human
beings but by the network of communications of which they are part. We discuss the
insights that can be gained by applying this theory to the study of strategic
management. We show that it leads to a reconceptualization of central issues
concerning strategy process, strategy content, and strategy context. On this basis, we
offer an outline of a framework for studying strategic management from a
Luhmannian perspective. This new framework highlights the paradoxical nature of
strategizing and conceptualizes strategic management as meta-communication in
organizations.
... We have already noted, for example, that decided orders are often more fragile than institutional orders are. Decided orders have the advantage, however, in that they can handle higher levels of complexity (Luhmann, 2000) and consequently are often introduced when the level of complexity increases (Knudsen, 2005). In addition, formal organizations are the only social order that can communicate in their own right (Luhmann, 2012(Luhmann, /2013. ...
This essay is motivated by two related observations about the field of organization studies. First, organization studies researchers have traditionally been good at importing ideas from other areas of research but poor at exporting their own ideas to other fields. Second, even within the field of organization studies, interest in organizations has decreased over the past decades as organization scholars have turned away from organizations to address such other phenomena as institutions or networks. Both developments are undermining the significance of organization studies as a distinctive field of research, the insights of which are necessary for understanding modern society. In this essay, we elaborate on recent suggestions by distinctively European scholars for strengthening concern for the particularities of organization in social theorizing. The first suggestion is to move decisions back to the core of the field. The second suggestion is to extend the notion of organization beyond organizations. We illustrate these two moves with examples from the literature and discuss implications for the future of organization studies.
... However, even when leaders and followers have a primary purpose of reaching understanding, the inherent complexity of their role will most likely continue to frustrate the full accomplishment of ideal speech acts. Moreover, paradox arises from the fact that any decision reached in an organisation also communicates that it could have been different, and that it is therefore subject to further challenge and debate (Knudsen, 2005). Communication is uncertain, contested and ambiguous. ...
'More' or 'better' leadership remains a popular panacea for business failure, climate change, educational underachievement and myriad other world problems. Yet there has been a growing concern that traditional approaches to the subject have naturalised oppressive power relationships, particularly in the workplace. Scholars have therefore put more stress on the creative contribution of 'followers' as co-creators of organisational reality. It is now normal to find calls for shared leadership, less leadership or no leadership. This article argues that even when couched in emancipatory terms, many of these perspectives still tend to diminish the contribution of organisational actors who do not occupy formal leadership roles. Communication and process theories of organisation are employed to suggest that leadership could be more usefully envisaged as those practices which see leaders occupying transitory roles within fluid social structures, in which there is no essence of leadership apart from the discursive constructions of organisational actors and in which the facilitation of disagreement and dissent holds the same importance as a traditional stress on the achievement of cohesion and agreement.
... In consultations, many actors are offered the opportunity to comment on the model. Characteristically, consultations involve many actors in the decision-making and the consultations take on the role of a sign of knowledge -whether or not the consultations have had an actual effect (see also Knudsen, 2005Knudsen, , 2006). Similarly, pilot studies end up representing knowledge independently of whether the experiences from the pilot studies have been incorporated or not. ...
Research dealing with governmental and managerial ideals and tools for transparency has observed how these tools co-create new types of blindness. It has documented the existence of three different types of blindness: blindness caused by power games, by cognitive limitations and blindness as a side effect of the categories applied. This paper puts forward a fourth type of organizational blindness in addition to the already documented ones, namely self-imposed blindness to potentially destructive information. This paper studies how relevant - but problematic - information is actively ignored and kept out of sight in the decision processes by looking at a specific case study involving the construction of a model intended to control, and render transparent, the quality of health services in Denmark. This paper outlines the forms of inattentiveness which make communication blind to information that could question the quality model. Five forms of inattentiveness are identified that function as answers to the question of how communication avoids actualizing relevant but also potentially destructive information. This study documents a considerable amount of blindness to potentially relevant themes and it points to activities that produce this blindness as they reduce the probability that potentially destructive subjects are actualized. Information is not only something organizations need, but may also be something they protect themselves against. In that case, the forms of inattentiveness may be a function that forms organizational processes.
... If decision communications are to be successfully completed, particular communicative provisions are required. Luhmann refers to them as means of deparadoxisation; that is, they are means of concealing the paradoxical form of the decision (on this point see particularly Knudsen, 2005; Ortmann, 2005). Below we will discuss several of these mechanisms, in particular the reference to previous decisions as decision premises and the fiction of the decision maker. ...
Niklas Luhmann’s theory of social systems has been widely influential in the German-speaking countries in the past few decades. However, despite its significance, particularly for organization studies, it is only very recently that Luhmann’s work has attracted attention on the international stage as well. This Special Issue is in response to that. In this introductory paper, we provide a systematic overview of Luhmann’s theory. Reading his work as a theory about distinction generating and processing systems, we especially highlight the following aspects: (i) Organizations are processes that come into being by permanently constructing and reconstructing themselves by means of using distinctions, which mark what is part of their realm and what not. (ii) Such an organizational process belongs to a social sphere sui generis possessing its own logic, which cannot be traced back to human actors or subjects. (iii) Organizations are a specific kind of social process characterized by a specific kind of distinction: decision, which makes up what is specifically organizational about organizations as social phenomena. We conclude by introducing the papers in this Special Issue.
... It can displace the paradox of a decision to its decision premises, 7 it can displace it to a decision maker (and thus ascribe intentions), by means of hearings it can displace it to the hearing partners. It can also deparadoxify the decision by interpreting it as a necessary answer to environmental development, thus displacing the paradox to developments in the environment (see Luhmann, 2000a;Andersen, 2003c;Knudsen, 2005). ...
The paper is concerned with the relationship between organization and society. It reinterprets Luhmann's conceptualization of the relation between decision-making organizational systems and code-based function systems in order to enable the theory to observe (historical and current) changes. The relations between organizations and function systems are described in terms of structural couplings and the couplings are set in relation to the deparadoxizations of organizations. The thesis of the paper is that the organization makes itself irritable to function systems through its deparadoxization strategies. This idea is first treated theoretically and then the paper demonstrates its productivity through an analysis of how standards in health care form structural couplings between decisions in health care organizations and function systems as they deparadoxify decisions. The analysis shows how the health care organizations seem to become irritable (and thus coupled) towards a plurality of function systems when they deparadoxify their decisions by means of standards.
... As the organizations exist they must have managed the paradoxes. This leads to the question of how organizations de-paradoxify their decisions (for empirical analyses on this basis see KNUDSEN, 2005KNUDSEN, , 2006KNUDSEN, , 2007. ...
The paper is a contribution to the discussions on how to combine systems theory and empirical research. The paper focuses on functional method, which on the one hand is claimed as the method of systems theory but on the other hand is often only mentioned in passing—in Niklas LUHMANN's later works as well as in recent discussions on systems theory. The contention of the paper is that functional method can still be an important driving force in the development of interesting empirical problematics and analyses. The first and major part of the paper is a reconstruction of main characteristics of functional method. It is demonstrated how the method generates observations and the question is raised about which problem(s) the method is a solution to. The second part discusses functional method in relation to Niklas LUHMANN's later theoretical developments, especially the theory of second order observation. The overall aim of the paper is to reconstruct central traits of functional method in order to demonstrate how it works, what its function is—and where its limitations might lie.
URN: urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs1003122
Systems theory has garnered significant criticism from internationally recognized experts in the field of organizational analysis. However, a sector of criminal doctrine is adopting a strict approach to this theory to justify socio-legally the application of corporate criminal liability (this is a trend that has been embraced by the Spanish Supreme Court and is spreading throughout Latin America). The systemic idea of organization excludes the individuals who constitute and manage the company, dehumanizing it, separating corporate governance from the role played by individuals and even attributing human attributes to the company. In other words, the members that make up the organization, as well as the influences or constraints they generate in the context of the interaction of individuals within a corporation, are disregarded in the analysis. As an alternative, this text proposes the essential outlines of an "anthropic model" of corporate criminal liability, which is built on theoretically and experimentally validated notions and methodologies: neo-institutionalism, game theory and behavioral compliance. In this anthropic model, the adoption and implementation of an effective and adequate governance system to prevent irregularities (or crimes) does not depend on the system itself, but depends directly on the commitment and implementation of the "human component" of the organization. La teoría de sistemas ha recibido críticas significativas por parte de expertos internacionalmente reconocidos en el campo del análisis de las organizaciones. Sin embargo, cierto sector de la doctrina penal está adoptando un enfoque estricto de esta teoría para justificar sociojurídicamente la aplicación de la responsabilidad penal de las empresas (una tendencia que ha sido aceptada por el Tribunal Supremo español y se está extendiendo por América Latina). La idea sistémica de la organización excluye del análisis a los individuos que constituyen y gestionan la empresa, deshumanizándola, separando la gobernanza corporativa del papel desempeñado por los individuos e incluso atribuyendo atributos humanos a la empresa. En otras palabras, se desestiman en el análisis penal tanto a los miembros que conforman la organización como a las influencias o constricciones que originan en ese contexto de interacción de individuos que configura la corporación. Como alternativa, se proponen los lineamientos esenciales de un “modelo antrópico” de responsabilidad penal corporativa, construido sobre nociones y metodologías teórica y experimentalmente validadas: neoinstitucionalismo, teoría de juegos y “behavioral compliance”. En este modelo antrópico, la adopción e implementación de un sistema de gobernanza efectivo y adecuado para prevenir irregularidades (o delitos) no depende del sistema en sí, sino que pende directamente del compromiso e implementación efectiva por parte del “componente humano” de la organización.
This chapter introduces two core notions from Niklas Luhmann’s social systems theory to paradox studies. Specifically, it offers the notions of decision paradox and deparadoxization as potential generative theoretical devices for paradox scholars. Drawing on these devices, the paper shifts focus to the everyday and mundane nature of decision paradox and the important role of deparadoxization (i.e. generating latency) in working through paradox. This contribution comes at a critical juncture for paradox scholarship, which has begun to converge around core theories, by opening up additional and possibly alternative theoretical pathways for understanding paradox. These ideas respond to recent calls in the literature to widen our theoretical repertoire and aligns scholarship more closely with the rich, pluralistic traditions of paradox studies.
This chapter introduces two core notions from Niklas Luhmann’s social systems theory to paradox studies. Specifically, it offers the notions of decision paradox and deparadoxization as potential generative theoretical devices for paradox scholars. Drawing on these devices, the paper shifts focus to the everyday and mundane nature of decision paradox and the important role of deparadoxization (i.e., generating latency) in working through paradox. This contribution comes at a critical juncture for paradox scholarship, which has begun to converge around core theories, by opening up additional and possibly alternative theoretical pathways for understanding paradox. These ideas respond to recent calls in the literature to widen our theoretical repertoire and align scholarship more closely with the rich, pluralistic traditions of paradox studies.
Purpose:
While previous health-care-related hybridity research has focused on macro- and micro-level investigations, this paper aims to study hybridization at the organizational level, with a specific focus on decision-making. The authors investigate how new politico-economic expectations toward a university hospital as a hybrid organization become internalized via organizational decision-making, resulting in the establishment of a new business collaboration and innovation-oriented unit.
Design/methodology/approach:
The authors employed a social systems theoretical framework to explore organizational decision-making processes involved in the establishment of the new hybrid hospital unit. Drawing on 15 interviews and nine organizational documents, the authors describe and analyze three decision-making cycles using the concepts of complexity, decision and justification.
Findings:
The findings reveal the challenging nature of decision-making during hybridization, as decisions regarding unprecedented organizational structures and activities cannot be justified by traditional decision premises. The authors show that decision-makers use a combination of novel justification strategies, namely, justification by problems, by examples and by obligations, to legitimize decisions oriented at non-traditional activities. Further, the analysis reveals how expectations of several societal systems, i.e. health care, education, science, law, economy and politics, are considered in decision-making taking place in hybrid organizations.
Originality/value:
The study draws attention to the complexity of decision-making in a hybrid context and highlights the role of justification strategies in partially reducing complexity by concealing the paradoxical nature of decision-making and ensuring the credibility of resulting decisions. Also, the study presents a move beyond the dualism inherent in many previous hybridity studies by illustrating the involvement of several societal systems in hybridization.
In this review essay, we explore how Luhmann's radical communication approach, which conceptualizes communication without recourse to human beings' intentions, can reorient existing research on organizational communication. We show how Luhmann's perspective puts decisions back into organizational communication studies, how it changes our perspective on organizational continuity and on organizational boundaries, and how it redirects our understanding of human agency in organizations. We also discuss three areas in which Luhmann's theory could draw inspiration from other research on organizational communication.
Scholars are increasingly seeking to develop theories that explain the underlying processes whereby leadership is enacted. This shifts attention away from the actions of ‘heroic’ individuals and towards the social contexts in which people with greater or lesser power influence each other. A number of researchers have embraced complexity theory, with its emphasis on non-linearity and unpredictability. However, some complexity scholars still depict the theory and practice of leadership in relatively non-complex terms. They continue to assume that leaders can exercise rational, extensive and purposeful influence on other actors to a greater extent than is possible. In effect, they offer a theory of complex organizations led by non-complex leaders who establish themselves by relatively non-complex means. This testifies to the enduring power of ‘heroic’ images of leader agency. Without greater care, the terminology offered by complexity leadership theory could become little more than a new mask for old theories that legitimize imbalanced power relationships in the workplace. This paper explores how these problems are evident in complexity leadership theory, suggests that communication and process perspectives help to overcome them, and outlines an agenda for further research on these issues.
Recently the Danish subway trains have begun to announce “on time” when they arrive at a Station on time. This action reflects a worrying acceptance of the normality of failure.
This article introduces one emergent theoretical perspective from the North American research field of organizational communication that has come to be called “communication constitutes organization“ (CCO). The CCO perspective ascribes to communication a fundamental role in the constitution of organizations: Organizations basically consist of interconnected events of communication.
Drawing on contemporary debates and processing a lacuna in organization and management studies and responding to calls from organizational practice, Phenomenology of the Embodied Organization explores the essential and inter-relational processes of the body and embodiment in organizational life-worlds.
Powerfully driven by the work practices of consulting firms, the presentation software Microsoft PowerPoint is increasingly used on all levels of business and educational communication. Nevertheless, slideware ranks among the least explored media in communication studies. This study investigates the role of PowerPoint in organizational communication, particularly in terms of a functional dilemma between its application for documentation as opposed to presentation purposes. The theoretical part of the analysis combines insights from both organizational communication studies (J. R. Taylor et al.) and social systems theory (N. Luhmann et al.). The empirical analysis shows that PowerPoint documents created for cross-project learning purposes contribute to an invisibilization rather than a visibilization of decision processes and their contingency. In the light of these results, existing efforts to promote knowledge management based on the learning-from-mistakes principle need to be reconsidered with respect to their realization in communicative practice. © Deutscher Universitäts-Verlag und VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften GWV Fachverlage GmbH, Wiesbaden 2008. All rights reserved.
Knowledge, learning, and memory are major concepts in management science and organization theory. First and foremost, they are attributed to individuals rather than organizations. Steffen Blaschke reconsiders the three major concepts in the light of social systems theory. He complements autopoietic organization theory with a clear-cut distinction between individual and organizational knowledge, learning, and memory. Following suit of agent-based modelling, he provides an operationalization of autopoietic organization theory in terms of computational simulation. The author subjects organizational structures and dynamics to a range of simulation scenarios, thereby questioning the effects of work groups and communities of practice as well as personnel turnover and layoff on knowledge, learning, and memory. © Gabler | GWV Fachverlage GmbH, Wiesbaden 2008. All rights reserved.
This article introduces Luhmann’s theory of social systems as a prominent example of communication as constitutive of organization (CCO) thinking and argues that Luhmann’s perspective contributes to current conceptual debates on how communication constitutes organization. The theory of social systems highlights that organizations are fundamentally grounded in paradox because they are built on communicative events that are contingent by nature. Consequently, organizations are driven by the continuous need to deparadoxify their inherent contingency. In that respect, Luhmann’s approach fruitfully combines a processual, communicative conceptualization of organization with the notion of boundary and self-referentiality. Notwithstanding the merits of Luhmann’s approach, its accessibility tends to be limited due to the hermetic terminology that it employs and the fact that it neglects the role of material agency in the communicative construction of organizations.
Traditionally, the role of leadership has received little attention in the literature dealing with organizational creativity. This article describes a study of the role of leadership and its implications for organizational creativity in pharmaceutical research and new drug development. Creative work in new drug development is to a large extent riddled with a series of paradoxes and non-linear causality and thus needs to be dealt with using leadership practices which help researchers overcome what would seem to be paradoxical. The study makes use of Niklas Luhmann’s concept of de-paradoxification to examine a number of opposing objectives and concepts which influence leadership practice during creative and innovative work. De-paradoxification, in this sense, does not mean solving the perceived paradox but making it manageable. This study is based on a series of interviews concerning how managers and scientists at three pharmaceutical companies conceive of leadership in creative environments. This article pinpoints the importance as well as the influence of leadership in both R&D settings, and in creative milieus in general, concluding that leadership is important in creative settings, but that it should be practiced by other means than those used in less complex environments. Consequently, more systematic research as well as more critical evaluations of the leadership literature are needed.
Various researchers have called for an `opening up' of Luhmann's systems theory. We take this short paper as an occasion for a critical reflection on the necessity, existence and possibilities of such an opening. We start by pointing out the inherent openness of Luhmann's theory, and, based on this, discuss three kinds of openings: the international opening, the theoretical opening and the empirical opening. With regard to the latter, we distinguish three general options of using Luhmann's theory for empirical research.
The emerging process view in organization studies conceptualizes organizations as fluid streams of organizing. If, however, organizations are conceived as consisting of something as ephemeral as processes, the question arises how the organization is then able to interconnect the very processes that constitute its existence. For studying this issue of connectivity we draw on one particular stream of process theorizing, that is, the theory of social systems by Niklas Luhmann. He argues that organizations are fundamentally grounded in paradox: they continuously require both to visibilize and to invisibilize the inherent contingency (i.e. alternativity) of processes in order to allow for interconnectivity between them. In this paper, we therefore examine one organizational form where the connectivity between processes is particularly at stake: the project organization. We present the findings of an empirical case study at a globally operating business consulting firm. The study involved the quantitative and qualitative analysis of 565 textual documents collected from cross-project learning databases as well as 14 qualitative interviews. We found that usually all that remains after a project has been completed is a collection of highly condensed PowerPoint documents. The narratives contained in those documents focused on consistency (e.g. highlighting "best practices" or "success stories") rather than contingency (e.g., doubts, mistakes, or alternative paths considered). Consequently, the processuality and contingency of each project remained opaque to non-participants. This also found expression in established practices of hiding the elephant, i.e. disguising the vast contingencies inherent to the processes that constitute the organization.
Konturen der Moderne - Die in diesem zweiten Band versammelten Essays formieren eine vielleicht überraschende Auflistung: Zwischen dem Narrentum des Mittelalters und heutiger Organisationsberatung, romantischer Liebe und moderner Lyrik, Jauner und Vaganten, wird ein gewaltiges Forschungsprogramm sichtbar. Peter Fuchs bewegt sich in den hier neu angeordneten Essays und Vorträgen mit systemtheoretischer Schärfe durch unterschiedlichste Bereiche der Moderne, wobei erneut die Reichweite und Beweglichkeit des systemtheoretischen Inventars vorgeführt wird.
Over the past three decades, Meyer, Jepperson, and colleagues have contributed to the development of one of the leading approaches in social theory, by analyzing the cultural frameworks that have shaped modern organizations, states, and identities. Bringing together key articles and new reflections, this volume collects the essential theoretical ideas of 'sociological neoinstitutionalism.' It clarifies the core ideas and situates them within social theory writ large. Among other topics, the authors discuss the changing nature of the “actors” that have operated within contemporary social structure. The book concludes with the evolving frameworks that have structured social activity in the post–World War II period of 'embedded liberalism,' in the more recent neoliberal period, and in an emergent post-liberal period that appears to be a radical departure.
Die Hoffnungen auf eine Lösung gesellschaftlicher Probleme durch politische Planung haben seit den 70er Jahren deutlich nachgelassen. Zugleich nimmt das Problembewußtsein zu. Die alten Probleme eines gerechten Wohlstandsausgleichs gewinnen mit wachsendem Wohlstand an politischem Gewicht. Ökologische Probleme kommen hinzu.
„Kann man sagen, daß Organisationen ein anderer Gegenstand sind als die Gesellschaft und ihre Teilsysteme, obwohl es doch in all diesen Teilsystemen von Organisationen nur so wimmelt und organisationsfreie Interaktionen, die sich gleichwohl einem Teilsystem der Gesellschaft ausschließlich zuordnen lassen, schwer zu entdecken sind? Worin besteht eigentlich der Unterschied dieser Systemformen? Und sodann: Wieso scheinen sie aufeinander angewiesen zu sein? [...] Während Gesellschaft, wenn überhaupt kommuniziert wird, immer schon da ist, können Organisationen in der Gesellschaft gebildet und aufgelöst werden. Organisationen existieren nicht außerhalb, sondern, da auch in ihnen kommuniziert wird, nur innerhalb der Gesellschaft. Sie sind eine besondere Form, Gesellschaft durch programmatisch verdichtete Kommunikation fortzusetzen. Sie eröffnen Entscheidungsspielräume, die es anderenfalls nicht gäbe, und sie ermöglichen es dadurch, die Irritabilität des Systems zu steigern.“
This section presents the third volume of Max Weber's fundamental work Economy and Society which has been translated into Russian for the first time. The third volume includes two works devoted to the sociology of law. The first, 'The Economy and Laws', discusses differences between sociological and juridical approaches to studies of social processes. It describes peculiarities of normative power arenas (orders) at different levels and demonstrates how they influence the economy. The second, 'Economy and Law' ('Sociology of Law'), reviews the evolution of law orders (primarily, the three "greatest systems of law" including Roman Law, Anglo-American Law, and European Continental Law) in the context of changes in the organization of economy and structures of dominancy. Law is considered an influential factor of the rationalization of social life which in turn is affected by a rationalized economy and social management. The Journal of Economic Sociology here publishes an excerpt from the chapter 'Law, Convention and Custom' in this third volume, which shows the role of the habitual in the formation of law; explains the importance of intuition and empathy for the emergence of new orders; and discusses the changeable borders between law, convention and custom. The translation is edited by Leonid Ionin and the chapter is published with the permission of HSE Publishing House. © 2018 National Research University Higher School of Economics. All rights reserved.
Genealogy "opposes itself to the search for "origins"".
"The development of humanity is a series of interpretations. The role of genealogy is to record its history: the history of morals, ideals, and metaphysical concepts, the history of the concept of liberty or the ascetic life".
"Among the philosophers idiosyncrasies is a complete denial of the body".
"Where religions once demanded the sacrifice of bodies, knowledge now calls for experimentation on ourselves, calls us to the sacrifice of the subject of knowledge. The desire for knowledge has been transformed among us into a passion which fears no sacrifice, which fears nothing but its own extinction. It may be that mankind will eventually perish from this passion for knowledge. If not through passion, than through weakness."
The central significance of intersubjectivity was already made clear by Husserl in the first volume of Ideen 1 on the occasion of an analysis of the natural attitude. The objective, spatio-temporal reality of a surrounding world (Umwelt), accepted not only by me but also by other ego-subjects (Ich-Subjekte), is taken for granted without question as an element of the general thesis (Generalthese) of the natural attitude. It is part of this general thesis that other ego-subjects are apprehended as fellow-men (Nebenmenschen) who have consciousness of the objective world as I do in spite of differences in perspectives and in degrees of clarity. It is also taken for granted that we can communicate with one another (Par. 29). How, in the frame of the natural attitude, is mutual understanding (Einverständnis) in principle possible? The answer given by Husserl in Ideen I (Par. 53), on the occasion of the preparatory analyses of pure consciousness, refers to the experience of a Unking of consciousness and body (Leib) to form a natural, empirical unity by means of which consciousness is located in the space and time of nature, and which, in acts of “empathy,” makes possible reciprocal understanding between animate subjects belonging to one world.
"Mehr Wettbewerb und weniger Organisation" lautet die populäre Antwort auf oftmals beklagte Innovationsdefizite. Diese Position lässt unberücksichtigt, dass Wettbewerb in den meisten Gesellschaftsbereichen Organisation voraussetzt. Überdies sind Organisationen für Prozesse gesellschaftlichen Wandels von großer Bedeutung. Im Rahmen einer organisationstheoretischen Analyse werden Umweltbezüge, interne Dynamiken und Formen der Vernetzung erörtert. Bei der Auseinandersetzung mit Wettbewerbsmechanismen werden soziale Konstruktionsprozesse und Dimensionen der Regulierung herausgearbeitet. Auf dieser Theoriegrundlage wird deutlich, dass das Zusammenspiel von Organisation und Wettbewerb vor allem Diffusionsprozesse begünstigt - also Nachahmung und Übernahme statt genuiner Innovationsfähigkeit.
Introduction: Body Politics The Body and Organisation Studies Written on the Body: Social Theory and the Body Bodily Knowledge: An Approach to Embodied Subjectivity The Scalpel: An Introduction to the Anatomising Urge Under the Knife: Anatomising Organisation Theory The Mirror Replicating Organisation Conclusions
An extension of the exchange model for the analysis of interorganizational relations is developed, incorporating into the model recent developments in exchange theory. Organizational interactions are viewed as networks of exchange relation, and various forms of interorganizational activity such as merger and coalition or alliance formation are analyzed in relation to power and position in the network. Linkages between various types of exchange networks and what economists refer to as market structures are examined. Finally, previous criticisms of exchange formulations are reviewed, and directions for future theoretical and empirical work concerning networks of interorganizational relationships are discussed.
Zusammenfassung
Der Text versucht, die bei Luhmann häufiger zu findende Formulierung „strukturelle Kopplung über Organisation " weiter zu entwickeln.1 Damit soll gezeigt werden, daß es sich bei der Formulierung um eine Zusammenfassung von drei möglichen Bedeutungen von Organisation im Zusammenhang mit strukturellen Kopplungen von Funktionssystemen handelt, die sich bei näherem Hinsehen wie folgt unterscheiden lassen: (Í) Organisation als Voraussetzung für strukturelle Kopplung: Organisationen stellen ganz allgemein mit ihren Strukturen die Voraussetzungen für die strukturelle Kopplung von Funktionssystemen bereit, dies gilt für nahezu alle Organisationen; (2) Organisation als strukturelle Kopplung: Organisationen sind selbst strukturelle Kopplungen von Funktionssystemen, so z.B. Universitäten in der Kopplung von Erziehung und Wissenschaft; (3) Organisation als Vermittler struktureller Kopplung: spezifische Organisationen stellen ihre Kommunikation zur Vermittlung und Realisierung von bestimmten strukturellen Kopplungen zur Verfügung, so zB. Finanzämter in der Vermittlung der strukturellen Kopplung von Politik und Wirtschaft durch Steuern. Von diesen drei möglichen Bedeutungen von Organisationen im Zusammenhang mit strukturellen Kopplungen muß deutlich unterschieden werden, daß Organisationen als Multireferenten ständig zwischen den verschiedenen Logiken der Funktionssysteme vermitteln. Abschließend soll die Annahme zur Diskussion gestellt werden, daß unter Globalisierungsbedingungen neue strukturelle Kopplungen von Funktionssystemen relevant werden, nämlich die „über" Organisationen. Die Ausführungen beziehen sich dabei auf die Globalisierungsentwicklungen in Recht und Wirtschaft.
PART I
Mathematico-Philosophical Prolegomena
Part II of this essay was written before Part I and offered to the Third Annual Symposium of the American Society for Cybernetics as a topic of discussion. However, owing to unforeseen circumstances, the paper was not presented at the Symposium. This turned out to be a blessing in disguise. In order to conform to the time limit for oral presentation Part II was written in a highly condensed manner and there was no opportunity to elaborate on the general epistemological aspect which served as the starting point for the intended confrontation between natural numbers and structural systems of higher complexity than our traditional logic offers. We are determined to make up for this omission in Part I because we believe that the theoretical goal of Part II will be better understood if the present author clarifies his attitude toward the basic concept of organism and its mathematical treatment in cybernetic research.
Zusammenfassung
Aus einer systemischen Perspektive kann das Wissen oder die Intelligenz eines Unternehmens nicht als in den Köpfen ihrer Mitglieder lokalisiert begriffen werden. Es ist in den Kommunikations- und Interaktionsprozessen impliziert, welche die Identität der Organisation als Einheit definieren. Eine lernende Organisation ist eine Organisation, die in der Lage ist, ihre Kommunikationsregeln zu verändern. Um dies zu tun, braucht sie ein Mittel der Beobachtung der eigenen Regeln und der Bewertung, ob das in ihnen implizierte Wissen noch angemessen ist. Manager und Berater als diejenigen, die »wissen«, wie ein Unternehmen »gesteuert« wird, müssen dekonstruiert werden. Ihre Autorität kann durch die Nutzung der Intelligenz von sich selbst reflektierenden Kommunikationsprozessen innerhalb der Organisation rekonstruiert werden. Deren Ergebnis kann ihrer Aktivität zugeschrieben werden, auch wenn es der Kommunikationsprozeß war, der die Beobachtungen und - in der Folge - die Entscheidungen hervorbrachte.
Zusammenfassung
Ein Grundthema soziologischer Theoriebildung, die Kritik der instrumentellen Vernunft, erhält durch die Informatisierung eine neue Virulenz. Die Computertechnologie, so wird befürchtet, werde die eigensinnigen Reflexions- und Kommunikationskulturen des gesellschaftlichen Lebens den Zwängen einer rücksichtslosen instrumentalistischen Rationalisierung unterwerfen. Der Realitätsbezug solcher Befürchtungen ist insbesondere hinsichtlich der Arbeitswelt kaum zu bestreiten, aber sie machen blind für eine Entwicklungsdialektik, die mit dem Theorem des „Imperialismus der instrumentellen Vernunft“ (Weizenbaum) nicht entschlüsselt werden kann. Am Thema der informationstechnologischen Transformation von betrieblichem Erfahrungs- in Planungswissen möchte ich die These zur Diskussion stellen, daß der Computereinsatz in der industriellen Produktion zwar zur Einebnung und Formierung von Erfahrungswissen, Eigensinn und kommunikativer Kompetenz führt, gleichzeitig aber auf paradoxe Weise zu ihrer Erneuerung beiträgt. Dies ist darauf zurückzuführen, daß die Informatisierung des Erfahrungswissens im wachsenden Maße auch auf reflexive Informationskompetenz und „Selbstbeobachtung“ der Beschäftigten angewiesen ist.
Economics, so they say, is eighty per cent psychology. In this book, the author shows that psychology is one hundred per cent economics. Every human interaction can be understood as a form of market economy. The theoretical explanation for this model follows from recent developments in systems and evolution theory and the epistemological concepts of so-called “radical constructivism”.
Human behaviour can be seen as a commodity that is differentiated, named, evaluated and exchanged. And that means: Anyone who acts, transacts!
This book elucidates what this means in theory and practice for a manager and his everyday life, the organisation of companies, management, achievement, planning and business culture; the author illustrates this in a number of case examples and complements it with recipes for a manager’s everyday life.
Der Begriff der Komplexität ist nicht erst in der neueren Zeit erfunden worden. Er ist kein spezifisch moderner Begriff. Will man seinen Gebrauch im modernen Jargon verstehen, ist es deshalb nützlich, zunächst einmal seine alteuropäischen Quellen zu studieren. Das reicht natürlich zur theoretischen Klärung nicht aus, gibt aber doch Anhaltspunkte für ein geschichtliches Verständnis der Differenz von alteuropäischen und modernen Begriffsfassungen.
Es soll in diesem Aufsatz um eine Analyse von institutionalisierten Bekenntnissen gehen. Die Beichte ist lediglich ein freilich wichtiger Spezialfall. Institutionelle Bekenntnisse haben nicht nur im Kontext religiöser sozialer Kontrolle eine große Rolle gespielt. Sie sind auch in rechtlichen Verfahren von zentraler Bedeutung. Schließlich ist gerade die allerjüngste Moderne — etwa seit dem 19. Jh. — durch eine Säkularisierung und gleichzeitig den gesteigerten Einsatz von Bekenntnisritualen charakterisierbar. Man denke an die Verwendung von biographischen Bekenntnissen in der Psychoanalyse, in der medizinischen Anamnese und nicht zuletzt in der Sozialforschung, die ihre Vorläufer in den Verfahren zur Erhebung von Bedürftigkeit hatte, die dann Basis für private oder öffentliche Fürsorge waren. Man könnte vielleicht sogar die empirische Sozialforschung als die natürliche Tochter der Heiligen Inquisition sehen (wenn etwas so Unheiliges wie natürliche Töchter mit der Heiligen Inquisition überhaupt in einem Atemzug genannt werden darf). Die Parallelität der öffentlichen Bekenntnisse der Ketzer und der Hexen in den Prozessen, wie sie die Heilige Inquisition inszenierte, und öffentlicher Selbstkritik in revolutionären Zirkeln oder in den Moskauer Schauprozessen ist überaus deutlich. Neben den Bekenntnissen, die man anderen macht, dürfen auch nicht die vergessen werden, die man lediglich in foro interno als Gewissenserforschung ablegt. Oft sind Selbstbekenntnisse nur Vorbereitungen zu vor dem religiösen oder psychoanalytischen Beichtvater zu leistenden Berichten, bisweilen aber entwickeln sie sich auch zu vollständig eigenen Formen aus, etwa zum Tagebuch oder zur Autobiographie2.
Wenn wir den Gedanken weiterverfolgen wollen, dass eine Organisation operativ aus (der Kommunikation von) Entscheidungen besteht,1 wird viel davon abhängen, was mit dem Begriff „Entscheidung“ bezeichnet wird. An dieser Stelle lässt sich, sollte man meinen, die Theorieentwicklung noch steuern, während sie im Folgenden dann rasch für Selbstkontrolle zu unübersichtlich werden wird.
Law as a system depends on other systems. It can only exist in a societal environment that produces many and different issues which have to be decided according to law. Its cases are created in face-to face interaction systems. Therefore, it must be examined how legal issues are raised and how they become a topic of face-to-face interaction. When such issues are raised, they get to be related to external systems which cannot be disposed of within the interaction. In every-day life there are many reasons making it unlikely for conflicts or commitments to be articulated with respect to law. One of the conditions for the creation and survival of legal culture seems to be the lowering of this threshold (normally rather high) for transforming issues into topics. However, whether this is a necessary prerequisite for industrial societies may be questioned with reference to the highly different conditions prevailing in such countries as Japan, Mexico or Germany.
Dieses Kapitel ist ein 1986 veröffentlichter Aufsatz,1 in dem ich die im Kapitel 2 angesprochene Thematik der Identitätsanforderungen komplexer Arbeitsorganisationen vertiefe. Dies geschieht in Auseinandersetzung mit der Industriesoziologie, weshalb hauptsächlich Arbeitstätigkeiten im stark durchrationalisierten Sektor der industriellen Produktion in den Blick genommen werden. Für die These der Erforderlichkeit einer individualistischen Identität — hier begrifflich über das Konzept der „Subjektivität“ angegangen — ist dies sicherlich der härteste Probierstein.
Zu den Aufgaben wissenschaftlicher Theoriebildung gehört es, das Verhältnis von Anwendungsbreite und Tiefenschärfe ihrer Begriffe und theoretischen Hypothesen zu regulieren. Je mehr Sachverhalte ein Begriff übergreifen soll, desto unbestimmter wird er. Wissenschaftspolitisch ist dieses Gesetz von außerordentlicher Bedeutung. Je stärker ein Fach entwickelt wird und je mehr verschiedenartiges Wissen sich ansammelt, desto schwieriger wird es, noch eine Gesamtkonzeption zu bilden, die man wissenschaftlich vertreten könnte. Der Fortschritt scheint in eine Fülle unzusammenhängender Details zu führen. Die Integration des Faches bleibt dagegen spekulativ veranlagten Unternehmern überlassen, die sich von den fachüblichen Standards dispensieren und sich mit Geschick der Kontrolle entziehen. Ihnen kann die Kreation von kurzlebigen Begriffsmoden gelingen, die die Forschung allenfalls anregen, nicht aber wirklich anleiten können. Die Zusammenschau ist mit dem Makel des Unseriösen behaftet, die Wissensvermehrung selbst mit dem Makel der Zusammenhanglosigkeit—beides Formen der Beliebigkeit.
Alle Interpretationen der Gesellschaft sind geschichtlich bedingt. Sie sind Gegenstand einer historischen Semantik. Für die moderne Gesellschaft ist diese Semantik in der zweiten Hälfte des 18. Jahrhunderts geformt worden1. Sie ist seitdem zwar vielfältig modifiziert, aber nicht grundlegend geändert worden. Das gilt in besonderem Maße für diejenigen Theorien, die Politik und Wirtschaft beschreiben und die in der Trennung dieser beiden Bereiche, aber auch in ihrem Zusammenspiel, in der „politischen Ökonomie“, das Wesen der modernen Gesellschaft zu erfassen suchen. Auch die „Kritik der politischen Ökonomie“ durch Karl Marx bewegt sich innerhalb dieser historischen Semantik. Der Neuheitsgehalt dieser Theorie wird zumeist überschätzt. Jedenfalls war die Gleichsetzung von Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft lange vor Marx üblich geworden, und die daraus folgende Unterschätzung des Politischen wurde sehr bald nach Marx wieder korrigiert.