Complexity Theory: A New Way to Look at Organizational Change
Abstract
There is a revolution in the physical sciences with applying new theories that emphasize holism, uncertainty, and nonlinearity and that de-emphasize reductionism, predictability and linearity. The interest is growing in applying these theories to the study of organizations, including public organizations. The classic model of the organization as a machine has long since been discredited, but the models that have replaced this metaphor have been less than satisfactory. The basic principles of complexity theory are explained using organizations as examples. Complexity theory suggests that organizational managers promote bringing their organizations to the “edge of chaos” rather than troubleshooting, to trust workers to self-organize to solve problems, to encourage rather than banish informal communications networks, to “go with the flow” rather than script procedures, to build in some redundancy and slack resources, and to induce a healthy level of tension and anxiety in the organization to promote creativity and maximize organizational effectiveness.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
There is an optimal point in a system when stabilizing and destabilizing forces are in a form of dynamic balance, at which conditions are created for the system to be at its most creative and to promote optimal learning and adaptation.
“Both Grobman (2005) and Waldrop (1992) point out that there is an optimal point in a system when stabilizing and destabilizing forces are in a form of dynamic balance.”
From What Does It Take to Implement Change Successfully? A Study of the Behaviors of Successful Change Leaders (2011) · cites this paper as Grobman, 2005
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Higgs, M., & Rowland, D. (2011) · The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science · doi:10.1177/0021886311404556 · Cited by 135 · see citing works
- Authors
- Grobman, G.
- Affiliations
- The Pennsylvania State University Harrisburg
- Venue
- Public Administration Quarterly
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2005-09
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 351-384
- ISSN
- 0734-9149 (ISSN-L)
- 2327-4433
- OpenAlex
- W177354265
- Cited by
- 140
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 5
- FWCI
- 1.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Public Administration Quarterly (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Chaos, Complexity, and Education
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Organizational Change and Leadership
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Management and Organizational Studies
- Keywords
- complexity theory, organizational change, holism, uncertainty, nonlinearity, reductionism, edge of chaos, self-organization, informal communication networks, slack resources, creativity, organizational effectiveness, public sector organizations
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review