CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 10Chaos, Complexity, and EducationCommunication Studies and MediaOrganizational Learning and Leadership

Complexity and Organizational Communication: A Quest for Common Ground

Open access
Poutanen, Petro, Siira, Kalle, Aula, Pekka·2016·Human Resource Development Review
DOI 10.1177/1534484316639713
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

In recent years, a growing body of literature has emerged from the intersection of complex systems science and organizational communication. However, due to the incoherence and immaturity of complexity science, this body of research is slightly disorganized. This article explores this research node using a meta-paradigmatic framework to untangle and clarify the different paradigmatic assumptions in the field of organizational communication research that has adopted the complexity science perspective. Our analysis reveals five research clusters that differ from each other in their understanding of what complexity is and in how they define communication. Based on our analysis, we present suggestions for finding common ground and point the way towards a future research agenda in complexity-based research in the areas of organizational communication and human resource development (HRD). In addition, we discuss the implications and possibilities that the complexity perspective can offer for HRD in practice.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This conceptual review applies a meta-paradigmatic framework to complexity-based research in organizational communication, sorting it into five clusters that differ in how they define complexity and communication. The authors argue the field lacks reflexivity and empirical grounding, and propose mixed methods, transcendent theory, and dialogue across paradigms as routes to common ground.

Key findings

  • The literature divides into two paradigmatic schools — objectivist and interpretivist — and five clusters: agent-based models and network analysis, network of texts (objectivist); meaning and interpretation, narratives and language, living activity (interpretivist).
  • Objectivist work treats complexity as an objective property of real systems and favors mathematical modeling, simulation, and large-scale text analysis; interpretivist work treats complexity as observer-originated and uses complexity concepts as metaphors, heuristics, and conceptual lenses.
  • Three recurring weaknesses are identified: heavy reliance on metaphor and analogy, insufficient reflexivity about the limits of imported concepts, and a shortage of empirical evidence, since much of the work is conceptual, simulation-based, or illustrative.
  • The authors recommend three ways forward: mixed qualitative–quantitative designs, a "transcendent" cross-perspective theory (structuration theory cited as an example) grounded in critical pluralism, and complementarity that fosters dialogue around shared problems rather than integration.

Methods

  • Design: a meta-paradigmatic literature review that untangles ontology, epistemology, and methodology in complexity-based organizational communication research, using the objectivist–interpretivist division as a "guiding theory" rather than a rigid binary.
  • Data: published conceptual and empirical studies from organizational communication and adjacent organizational research, organized into the five clusters and presented in two summary tables.
  • Analysis: interpretive categorization of each cluster's assumptions about what complexity is, how it can be known, appropriate methods, strategies for handling complexity, and its conception of communication.

Limitations

  • Stated by the paper: cluster boundaries are not definitive and the clusters overlap and interact; the objectivist–interpretivist dichotomy is presented as a continuum and the authors caution against caricatured oppositions and straw-man readings.
  • Stated by the paper: the reviewed complexity literature itself suffers from a lack of empirical evidence, with much work resting on simulations, illustrative examples, and anecdotal cases rather than empirical data.
  • Evident in the text: no systematic search strategy, inclusion criteria, or database protocol is reported, so the selection of illustrative studies appears purposive rather than exhaustive; the authors also note that the line between general organizational studies and organizational communication research is blurry in this literature.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1534484316639713

Cites

122 of 122 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 63 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data

    The paper's analysis revealed five research clusters that differ from each other in their understanding of what complexity is and in how they define communication.

    “Our analysis revealed five research clusters that differ from each other in their understanding of what complexity is and in how they define communication.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The prevalence of studies inspired and informed by terminology, theories, methods, and ideas derived from complexity science is vast.
  • Findingcitation

    Much of the complexity literature on organizational communication is conceptual or theoretical in nature.

    “Much of the literature is conceptual or theoretical in nature, introducing the complexity approach to a specific area of study (e.g.Leeuwis & Aarts, 2011), providing alternative views or methods to the analysis (e.g.Corman et al., 2002), or reflecting the use of complexity science in the communication research in general (e.g.Tsoukas & Hatch, 2001).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Leeuwis & Aarts, 2011 source
    • cites Corman et al., 2002 source
    • cites Tsoukas & Hatch, 2001 source
  • Findingreasoning

    There is a lack of reflexivity in the utilization of complexity concepts in organizational communication research.

    “What we regard as more alarming is the lack of reflexivity in the utilization of the complexity concepts in the organizational communication research.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingreasoning

    There is an apparent lack of empirical evidence in the complexity literature on organizational communication.

    “Second, there is also an apparent lack of empirical evidence in the complexity literature on organizational communication.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingnone given

    The literature review indicates that metaphors and analogies are the main tools for employing complexity concepts in the organizational communication literature.

    “First, the literature review indicates that metaphors and analogies are the main tools for employing the complexity concepts in the organizational communication literature.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 56
  • May combine two claims. 24

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given

    The fourth cluster departs from the meaning-centered work by explicitly stressing the importance of narratives, language, and discourse in constituting organizations.

    “The fourth cluster departs from the meaning-centered work by explicitly stressing the importance of narratives, language, and discourse in constituting organizations.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given

    The second cluster includes the research aimed at capturing the dynamics of complex social collectives by examining organizational communication as a network of texts.

    “Network of texts.The second cluster includes the research aimed at capturing the dynamics of complex social collectives by examining organizational communication as a network of texts.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The most frequently utilized methodological solution within the objectivist school of complexity is agent-based modeling (ABM).

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    The objectivist literature views organizations as networks of communicating agents or text and utilizes computational modeling and sophisticated mathematical analyses to capture the complexities of organizing.

    “In sum, the objectivist literature views organizations as networks of communicating agents or text and utilizes computational modeling and sophisticated mathematical analyses to capture the complexities of organizing.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Findingnone given

    The objectivist complexity-based studies have approached communication as networks of actors participating in information exchange and knowledge creation.

    “In general, the objectivist complexity-based studies have approached communication as networks of actors participating in information exchange and knowledge creation.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    The third cluster explicitly disengages itself from the traditional information transmission view of communication and connects with the cultural aspects of organizations.

    “It also explicitly disengages itself from the traditional information transmission view of communication and connects with the cultural aspects of organizations.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Findingnone given

    The interpretivist work comprises three identifiable clusters: meaning and interpretation, narratives and language, and living activity.

    “The interpretivist work comprises three identifiable clusters: meaning and interpretation, narratives and language, and living activity.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    Yet others have emphasized the interactions of communicators and have regarded organizing as a collective and relational sense-making process embedded and embodied in the actions and interactions of agents.

    “Yet others have emphasized the interactions of the communicators and have regarded organizing as a collective and relational sense-making process embedded and embodied in the actions and interactions of the agents.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given

    Within the objectivist work, there are two identifiable strands: agent-based models and network of texts.

    “The Objectivist Work Within the objectivist work, there are two identifiable strands: agent-based models and network of texts.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The most frequently utilized methodological solution within the objectivist school of complexity is agent-based modeling (ABM).

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Findingnone given

    There have been numerous critical remarks about complexity theory and its applications in, and applicability to, organizational communication research.

    “There have been numerous critical remarks about complexity theory and its applications in, and applicability to, the organizational communication research.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Findingnone given

    The extensive use of metaphors and analogies is characteristic of the complexity literature in the social and organizational sciences in general.

    “The extensive use of metaphors and analogies is characteristic of the complexity literature in the social and organizational sciences in general.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    Some researchers have emphasized the narrative, rather than representative, nature of human communication and organizing, and have seen stories and conversational patterns as complex and chaotic processes themselves.

    “On the other hand, some researchers have emphasized the narrative, rather than representative, nature of human communication and organizing, and have seen stories and conversational patterns as complex and chaotic processes themselves.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    The interpretivist complexity-based studies have adopted a different stance on the applicability of complexity theory and have used language and meaning-making processes as their starting points.

    “The interpretivist complexity-based studies have adopted a different stance on the applicability of complexity theory and have used language and meaning-making processes as their starting points; it is the ongoing negotiation of meanings that can be understood through complexity terms.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingcitation

    The final cluster differs from the previous two interpretivist clusters by arguing for the importance of focusing on the present, living activity to understand the dynamic processes of human interaction.

    “The final cluster differs from the previous two interpretivist clusters by arguing for the importance of focusing on the present, living activity to understand the dynamic processes of human interaction.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingreasoning

    The line between studies on organizations in general and the research of organizational communication scholars seems somewhat blurry in relation to complexity-based research.

    “First, the line between studies on organizations in general and the research of organizational communication scholars seems somewhat blurry in relation to the complexity-based research.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Findingnone given

    Such constructs as communication, information, and knowledge are important concepts in organizational scholars' works across different research communities.

    “On the one hand, such constructs as communication, information, and knowledge are important concepts in organizational scholars' works across different research communities.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Findingnone given

    Regardless of paradigmatic orientation, complexity scholars stress the principle of unpredictability in complex human organizations, which rejects calculated interventions to get predefined outcomes.

    “Regardless of the paradigmatic orientation they represent, they stress the principle of unpredictability in complex human organizations, which rejects calculated interventions in order to get predefined outcomes.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    The boundaries between the different clusters are not definitive; the clusters interact in many ways and share some similarities, such as the focus on text and speech in both paradigms and the focus on organizations as networks.

    “The boundaries between the different clusters are not definitive; the clusters interact in many ways and share some similarities, such as the focus on text and speech in both paradigms and the focus on organizations as networks.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Findingnone given

    The objectivist and interpretivist schools reflect different conceptions of what a complex system is.

    “The different schools reflect different conceptions of what a complex system is”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    Interpretivist work draws mainly from constructivist and interpretive foundations, favors subjective interpretations and the relationality of meaning and action, and focuses on symbolic means of communication such as text or narratives.

    “The interpretivist work, on the other hand, draws mainly from the constructivist and interpretive foundations and favors subjective interpretations and the relationality of meaning and action, and focuses on symbolic means of communication, such as text or narratives.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Findingnone given

    Organizational communication and general organizational studies researchers alike have participated in the philosophical debates on the role of complexity.

    “On the other hand, organizational communication and general organizational studies researchers alike have participated in the philosophical debates on the role of complexity”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Findingnone given

    Complexity-based research uses various definitions of communication, from information transmission to text, discourses, and behavioral patterns and relational activities.

    “The complexity-based research uses various definitions of communication, from information transmission to text, discourses, and behavioral patterns and relational activities.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Premisenone given

    A growing body of literature has emerged from the intersection of complex systems science and organizational communication.

    “In recent years, a growing body of literature has emerged from the intersection of complex systems science and organizational communication.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The prevalence of studies inspired and informed by terminology, theories, methods, and ideas derived from complexity science is vast.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Premisecitation

    A well demonstrated way to clarify conceptual confusion and correct the absence of a paradigmatic context for research is to examine the paradigmatic assumptions of the field, that is, ontology, epistemology, and methodology.

    “A well demonstrated way to clarify such conceptual confusion and correct the absence of a paradigmatic context for the research is to examine the paradigmatic assumptions of the field, that is, ontology, epistemology, and methodology (Dewulf et al., 2009;Gioia & Pitre, 1990).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Dewulf et al., 2009 source
    • cites Gioia & Pitre, 1990 source
    • Rests on an assumption: The field of complexity theory has also been less organized itself, leading to confusion that could have been avoided, had scholars more clearly based their reasoning on certain paradigmatic underpinnings.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Complexity science is not a methodology or toolbox but provides a conceptual framework, a way of thinking, and a way of seeing the world.

    “Nor is it a methodology or toolbox but it provides”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Mitleton-Kelly, 2003

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Complexity science is not a single, unified body of theory but an emerging approach.

    “Thus, it must be stressed that complexity science is not a single, unified body of theory but an emerging approach (Walby, 2007).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Walby, 2007 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Complex systems have the capacity to self-organize, meaning that they are able to respond to external perturbations by reorganizing internal structures through feedback loops.

    “Furthermore, complex systems have the capacity to self-organize, meaning that they are able to respond to external perturbations by reorganizing internal structures through feedback loops (Gregson & Guastello, 2011).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Gregson & Guastello, 2011

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Premisenone given

    Despite critiques, complexity science has had a wide reach and influenced many organizational communication researchers.

    “Despite such critiques, the complexity science has had a wide reach and influenced many organizational communication researchers.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The prevalence of studies inspired and informed by terminology, theories, methods, and ideas derived from complexity science is vast.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    Due to the incoherence and immaturity of complexity science, the body of research at the intersection of complex systems science and organizational communication is slightly disorganized.

    “However, due to the incoherence and immaturity of complexity science, this body of research is slightly disorganized.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The field of complexity theory has also been less organized itself, leading to confusion that could have been avoided, had scholars more clearly based their reasoning on certain paradigmatic underpinnings.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Recently, the perspective emphasizing 'communication as organizing' rather than 'communication in organizations' has gained increasing attention from scholars gathered under the rubric of the communicative constitution of organization (CCO).

    “Recently, the latter perspective emphasizing”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Mcphee & Zaug, 2000

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Taylor & Van Every, 2000

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The objectivist approach stresses the importance of adding precision and rigor to the study of organizational communication as a dynamic process and the need for techniques and methodologies capable of handling large quantities of communication.

    “This approach stresses the importance of adding precision and rigor to the study of organizational communication as a dynamic process (Contractor, 1994) and the need for techniques and methodologies that are capable of handling large quantities of communication (Corman et al., 2002).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Contractor, 1994

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Corman et al., 2002 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The role of the objectivist/interpretivist dichotomy in this article is as a continuum, including many kinds of research perspectives, which can be more objectivist or more subjectivist, or share characteristics of both traditions.

    “Rather, we see the dichotomy more as a continuum, including many kinds of research perspectives, which can be more objectivist or more subjectivist, or share characteristics of both tradition.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: To maintain a distinction between subjectivism and objectivism has proved to be problematic in practice.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    The studies categorized under the first cluster (Agent-based models and network analysis) represent probably the most ambitious and far-reaching quantitative developments in the area of organizational communication research.

    “The studies categorized especially under the first cluster (Agent-based models and network analysis) represent probably the most ambitious and far-reaching quantitative developments in the area of organizational communication research.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Organizations and their members should also be seen as interpretive, sense-making systems.

    “Along this line, organizations and their members should also be seen as interpretive, sense-making systems (Maguire et al., 2006, p. 175).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Maguire et al., 2006 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The interpretivist approach tends toward postmodernism or poststructuralism and adopts a meaning-based ontology and epistemology.

    “The objectivist approach tends toward positivism and draws heavily from the traditional natural scientific epistemology, whereas the interpretivist approach tends toward postmodernism or poststructuralism and adopts a meaning-based ontology and epistemology.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Boisot and Child (1999) source
    • cites Maguire et al. (2006) source
    • cites Morin (2007) source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Organizational communication scholars have long identified and debated similar paradigmatic differences when defining the research field.

    “Third, the organizational communication scholars have long identified and debated similar paradigmatic differences when defining the research field (Corman & Poole, 2000;Krone, Jablin, & Putnam, 1987).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Corman & Poole, 2000

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Krone, Jablin, & Putnam, 1987

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    According to the interpretivist view, organizations should be considered as if they too are complex systems.

    “Thus, whereas objectivists start from the outset with the notion that human organizations really are complex systems, according to the interpretivist view, organizations should be considered as if they too are complex systems (e.g., Uden et al., 2001).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Uden et al., 2001

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Ontologically speaking, complexity is an objective phenomenon caused by the structural intricacy, connectedness, and interdependency of the phenomenon under study.

    “Ontologically speaking, complexity is an objective phenomenon caused by the structural intricacy, connectedness, and interdependency of the phenomenon under study (Maguire, 2011).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Maguire, 2011

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The third cluster of complexity-based organizational communication research is rooted in social constructionist premises and views meaning and interpretation as essential characteristics of organizational communication.

    “The third cluster is rooted in social constructionist premises (Berger & Luckmann, 1966), and it views meaning and interpretation as essential characteristics of organizational communication.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Berger & Luckmann, 1966

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The objectivist approach tends toward positivism and draws heavily from the traditional natural scientific epistemology.

    “The objectivist approach tends toward positivism and draws heavily from the traditional natural scientific epistemology, whereas the interpretivist approach tends toward postmodernism or poststructuralism and adopts a meaning-based ontology and epistemology.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Boisot and Child (1999) source
    • cites Maguire et al. (2006) source
    • cites Morin (2007) source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Complexity-like information has no objective existence but can be considered as a subjective, observer-oriented phenomenon reflecting the difficulty of representing and predicting the observed system.

    “From this, it follows that complexity-like information in general-has no objective existence but can be considered as a subjective, observer-oriented phenomenon reflecting the difficulty of representing and predicting the observed system (Maguire, 2011, p. 838).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Maguire, 2011

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Premisenone given

    The interpretivist approach utilizes complexity theory mainly by employing its concepts that can be used as metaphors and heuristics of social life.

    “On the other hand, the interpretivist approach utilizes complexity theory mainly by employing its concepts that can be used as metaphors and heuristics of social life.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Interpretivists usually maintain the incommensurability thesis, arguing that the social and natural sciences are sharply distinct from each other.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    Despite critical remarks, complexity science provides an important theoretical opening for accounting for the complexities of organizational communication phenomena.

    “Despite the critical remarks made about the foundations and applications of complexity sciences in organizational communication literature, we suggest that it provides an important theoretical opening for accounting for the complexities of organizational communication phenomena.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Complexity sciences provide a meta-theoretical lens that can be used and developed to understand both structure (system-level/collective phenomena) and action (rules guiding agents' behaviors) and the interplay between them (upward and downward causation/emergence).

    “In this sense, complexity sciences themselves provide a meta-theoretical lens that can be used and developed to understand both the structure (system-level/collective phenomena) and action (rules guiding agents' behaviors) and the interplay between them (upward and downward causation/emergence; see Maguire, 2011).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Maguire, 2011

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Complexity science offers a fresh framework to rethink the basic assumptions and tenets of traditional HRD thinking and provides a rich source of metaphors to guide the design of organizational processes and actions.

    “On one hand, complexity science offers a fresh framework to rethink the basic assumptions and tenets of traditional HRD thinking and provides a rich source of metaphors to guide the design of organizational processes and actions (Maguire, Allen & Kelvey, 2011).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Maguire, Allen & Kelvey, 2011

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    The complexity perspective highlights the value of polyphony and diversity in organizations, which requires skills to continuously balance opposing tendencies and preserve diversity.

    “The complexity perspective highlights the value of polyphony and diversity in organizations, which requires skills to continuously balance the opposing tendencies and preserve diversity.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    A qualitative approach would add richness and depth, and quantitative methods would extend the temporal breadth of a study.

    “However, a qualitative approach would add richness and depth, and quantitative methods would extend the temporal breadth of a study, explains Salem (p. 215).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Salem

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Formal models can be used as sources of information for informal analysis, which in turn can suggest new ideas to enrich formal analysis.

    “Formal models can be used as sources of information for informal analysis, which in turn can suggest new ideas to enrich formal analysis (Poole, 2014, p. 60).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Poole, 2014

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    The lack of empirical data is not entirely surprising, given that complexity approaches are rather new to the social sciences.

    “Overall, the lack of empirical data is not entirely surprising, given that complexity approaches are rather new to the social sciences.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Complexity science offers a variety of conceptual and methodological tools to tackle issues of emergence, self-organization, evolution and transformation, which seem relevant in HRD's quest for improving organizational and individual performance.

    “On the other hand, it offers a variety of conceptual and methodological tools to”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Maguire et al.

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    Complexity science has potential value to HRD and could contribute significantly to the practice and research of HRD, which has firm roots in system theory.

    “We concur with previous notions of complexity science's potential value to HRD (i.e. Iles & Yolles, 2003) and believe that it could contribute significantly to the practice and research of HRD, which has firm roots in system theory (e.g.Gradous, 1989;Swanson, 2001;Jacobs, 2014).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Iles & Yolles, 2003

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Gradous, 1989

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Swanson, 2001 source
    • Rests on an assumption: Insights from complexity-based organizational communication research are transferable to HRD.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Many speculative writings and considerable theoretical modeling are based on computer simulations, illustrative examples, anecdotal empirical cases, and analogies and metaphors; however, these do not amount to empirical evidence.

    “Thus, many speculative writings and considerable theoretical modeling are based on computer simulations, illustrative examples, anecdotal empirical cases, and analogies and metaphors; however, these do not amount to empirical evidence (Contractor, 1999, p. 156;Corman et al., 2002;Scott, 2002).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Contractor, 1999 source
    • cites Corman et al., 2002 source
    • cites Scott, 2002

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Many methods are needed, including non-empirical approaches from the metaphoric stance.

    “Many methods are needed, including the non-empirical approaches from the metaphoric stance.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    In practice, it is possible to combine quantitative and qualitative approaches in many ways.

    “In practice, it is possible to combine quantitative and qualitative approaches in many ways (Mingers, 2001).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Mingers, 2001 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    The complexity approach seems to necessitate various research skills, ranging from general theoretical and philosophical understanding to subject-related theoretical understanding and methodological knowledge and skills, such as computing and mathematics, reaching well beyond the expertise of traditional social scientists and organization researchers.

    “The complexity approach seems to necessitate various research skills, ranging from general theoretical and philosophical understanding to subject-related theoretical understanding and methodological knowledge and skills, such as computing and mathematics, reaching well beyond the expertise of traditional social scientists and organization researchers.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    HRD and complexity are compatible in many ways; they are both highly multidisciplinary, aim to understand organizational functioning, and harness the potential of organizations.

    “In fact, HRD and complexity seem compatible in many ways; they are both highly multidisciplinary in nature, aim to understand organizational functioning, and harness the potential of organizations.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The perspective adopted by researchers of human interaction dynamics resonates strongly with those in organizational communication and HRD and represents a promising research avenue for them.

    “The perspective adopted by these researchers resonates strongly with those in the areas of organizational communication and HRD and represents a promising research avenue for them.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Communication researchers are ill equipped to study complex organizational communication phenomena using existing research methods.

    “On the other hand, as Corman et al. (2002) noted, communication researchers are”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Corman et al., 2002 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    No one paradigm can fully capture reality; rather, each provides a perspective on it (critical pluralism).

    “In essence, no one paradigm can fully capture the reality, but rather provides a perspective on ita position called critical pluralism (Mingers, 2001).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Mingers, 2001 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Descriptions from either side alone are inadequate.

    “Descriptions from either side alone are inadequate.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    The complexity approach does not exclude the role of external influence or change agents; rather, it places emphasis on low-level, bottom-up processes that produce emergent, potentially transformative outcomes in specific contexts.

    “The complexity approach does not however exclude the role of external influence or change agents; rather, it places emphasis on low-level, bottom-up processes that produce emergent, potentially transformative outcomes in specific contexts as illustrated by Leeuwis and Aarts and Siira.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    In organizational communication, adopting this view means we could conceptualize organization as a complex system where the organization's macro-level structures arise out from local arenas of communicative interactions.

    “In organizational communication context adopting this view means that we could conceptualize organization as complex system where the organization's macro-level structures arise out from local arenas of communicative interactions (Aula, 1999).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Aula, 1999

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Premisecitation

    Human interaction and organizations could be studied from the complexity perspective in a complementary way rather than replacing existing approaches that emphasize inter-subjectivity and meaning-making rather than objective measurement of information as a physically measurable quantity.

    “Indeed, we agree with notion made by Hazy et al. (2013) according to which human interaction and organizations could be studied from the complexity perspective in a complement way”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Hazy et al., 2013
62 of 62

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The prevalence of studies inspired and informed by terminology, theories, methods, and ideas derived from complexity science is vast.

    “The prevalence of studies inspired and informed by terminology, theories, methods, and ideas derived from the complexity science is vast.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    A common denominator in these studies is their use and application of various concepts of complexity science.

    “A common denominator in these studies is their use and application of various concepts of complexity science, such as selforganization, nonlinearity, emergence, complex networks, coevolution, fractals, bifurcations, autopoiesis, chaos, etc.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The use of these concepts is manifold and unestablished.

    “However, as the range of different applications implies, the use of these concepts is manifold and unestablished.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The field of complexity theory has also been less organized itself, leading to confusion that could have been avoided, had scholars more clearly based their reasoning on certain paradigmatic underpinnings.

    “However, the field of complexity theory has also been less organized itself, leading to confusion that could have been avoided, had the scholars more clearly based their reasoning on certain paradigmatic underpinnings.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The most frequently utilized methodological solution within the objectivist school of complexity is agent-based modeling (ABM).

    “The most frequently utilized methodological solution within this school of complexity is agent-based modeling (ABM), which researchers employ for simulating organizational phenomena.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Interpretivists usually maintain the incommensurability thesis, arguing that the social and natural sciences are sharply distinct from each other.

    “Interpretivists usually maintain the incommensurability thesis, arguing that the social and natural sciences are sharply distinct from each other.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    To maintain a distinction between subjectivism and objectivism has proved to be problematic in practice.

    “However, to maintain a distinction between subjectivism and objectivism, has proved to be problematic in practice.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The objectivist approach sees complexity as inherent in reality and considers complexity theory as the new normal science that reaches toward objectifying this complexity.

    “The objectivist approach sees complexity as inherent in reality and considers complexity theory as the new”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The interpretivist approach regards the idea of objectifying complexity with suspicion and sees complexity as an observer-originated phenomenon.

    “The interpretivist approach, however, regards the idea of objectifying complexity with suspicion and sees complexity as an observer-originated phenomenon.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The literature reviewed is representative of complexity-based organizational communication research.

    “First, the literature review indicates that metaphors and analogies are the main tools for employing the complexity concepts in the organizational communication literature.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The clustering of the literature into objectivist and interpretivist clusters is a valid and exhaustive categorization.

    “The third cluster is rooted in social constructionist premises (Berger & Luckmann, 1966), and it views meaning and interpretation as essential characteristics of organizational communication.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Insights from complexity-based organizational communication research are transferable to HRD.

    “Of most interest to us is the literature in the intersection of complexity theory and organizational communication, which provides a few interesting insights and potential directions for HRD as well.”
12 of 12

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Maguire citation points outside the listed chapter

    Minor

    The citation specifies page 838, but the only Maguire (2011) work in the references spans pages 79-92.

  • Uddin study has conflicting publication years

    Minor

    The text dates the Uddin et al. study to 2010, while the matching reference lists it as published in 2011.

2 of 2

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 20

  1. Aula P., 2007, Complex systems leadership theory, 367
  2. Byrne D., 2011, The Sage handbook of complexity and management, 131
  3. Cilliers P. (1998). Complexity and postmodernism: Understanding complex systems. London, England: Routledge.
  4. Contractor N. S., 1996, Cycles and dynamic processes in communication processes, 216
  5. Eyoang G. H., 2011, The Sage handbook of complexity and management, 317
  6. Hazy J. K., 2013, Emergence: Complexity & Organization, 15, 91
  7. Isbell M. J., 2009, Paper presented at the annual meeting of the NCA 95th Annual Convention
  8. Kristiansen M., 2013, International Journal of Action Research, 9, 95
  9. Lichtenstein B. M., 2004, Paper presented at the Academy of Management Annual Meeting
  10. Maguire S., 2011, The Sage handbook of complexity and management, 79
  11. Mitleton-Kelly E., 2011, The Sage handbook of complexity and management, 349
  12. Pigliucci M., 2000, Skeptic, 8, 62
  13. Poole M. S., 2014, The Sage handbook of organizational communication, 49
  14. Richardson K. A., 2011, The Sage handbook of complexity and management, 366
  15. Rocco T. S., 2003, Information Technology, Learning, and Performance Journal, 21, 19
  16. Salem P., 2009, The complexity of human communication
  17. Salem P., 2003, Annual Meeting of the International Communication Association Meeting
  18. Shotter J., 2011, The Sage handbook of complexity and management, 333
  19. Stephens K. K., 2007, Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Communication Association
  20. Van Uden J., 2001, Tamara: Journal of Critical Postmodern Organization Science, 1, 53

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Poutanen, P., Siira, K., & Aula, P.
Affiliations
  • University of Helsinki (FI)
  • Constra Group, Helsinki, Finland
  • Finnish Academy of Science and Letters (FI)
Corresponding author
Poutanen, Petro
ORCID
Poutanen, Petro
Venue
Human Resource Development Review
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2016-03-31
Volume
15
Issue
2
Pages
182-207
ISSN
  • 1534-4843 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-6712
DOI
10.1177/1534484316639713
OpenAlex
W2329199108
Cited by
10
References
122
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1
FWCI
1.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Human Resource Development Review (publishedVersion)
  • Työväentutkimus Vuosikirja (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Chaos, Complexity, and Education
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Communication Studies and Media
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Organizational Learning and Leadership
Keywords
complexity science, organizational communication, complex systems, metaparadigm, research paradigms, research clusters, human resource development, future research agenda

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-11.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-11.

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