Complex Responsive Processes in Organizations. Learning and Knowledge Creation. - book review

Organization Studies, Nov-Dec, 2002

Ralph D. Stacey: Complex Responsive Processes in Organizations. Learning and Knowledge Creation

Koen Frenken Faculty of Geographical Sciences, Utrecht University, The Netherlands

2001, London and New York: Routledge. 258 pages.

The main goal of the new book by Stacey is to develop an alternative approach to knowledge management in organizations, an approach different from what he calls 'mainstream system thinking'. The book is part of a new book series edited by Stacey, Griffin and Shaw on Complexity and Emergence in Organizations.

Stacey describes system thinking as being based a cognitivist theory that analyzes individuals as processors of information. Given limited capacity to process information, individuals rely on representations of an outer pregiven (but possibly changing) selection environment. Learning takes place through a negative feedback mechanism of adaptation through trial-and-error. Knowledge creation in system thinking is described by distinguishing between the individual level and the social level. In short, tacit knowledge resides in individuals and can become available to other individuals through the system of language or through a process of imitation. In both cases, there is a notion of sender--receiver that describes interaction solely in terms of exchange of information bases on tacit knowledge already residing in the individual. Knowledge creation is thus not really explained, as new knowledge does not arise from interaction between individuals. Accordingly, the central problem in mainstream knowledge managemen t is how the tacit knowledge already residing in individuals can be put to use in achieving an organization's goals.

The main purpose of Stacey's review of mainstream system thinking is to contrast these approaches to his own alternative approach, so it is clearly more interesting to go immediately into his theory of 'complex responsive processes'. In my reading, his approach hangs on two central theses. First, the distinction between the individual and the social is judged as being unhelpful, because only through communicative interaction is meaning produced. Second, the distinction between a system and its environment is also unhelpful, because the goals of an organization cannot be derived from an outer selection environment, as goals are also constructed and negotiated within the process of communicative interaction.

Stacey's approach provides a welcome alternative perspective on the theory and tools of knowledge management. Concerning the theory of knowledge management, Stacey argues that the creation of new knowledge, and thereby the process of organizational change itself, is to be viewed as a self-organized process of communicative interaction between individuals in the organization. From this, it follows that organizational change cannot be designed by formulating new goals and designing paths on how to arrive at these goals. It is during the self-organizing processes among individuals that new goals are formulated and new knowledge is created to achieve these goals. For this reason, knowledge management should start from facilitating conversation about what people are doing at present, rather than discussing what goals should be met in a yet unknown future of the organization. This thesis is further illustrated by a few examples from Stacey's own practice.

The analysis of knowledge creation as a social process of communicative interaction cannot really be ascribed to Stacey. A whole literature on social constructivism from the last twenty years--a literature that is surprisingly little used--is available from social studies of science and technology. The main novelty and contribution of this book is more Stacey's attempt to integrate the perspective of communicative interaction with complexity theory developed in the natural sciences.

Stacey develops his thesis by drawing an analogy between knowledge creation and self-organization in natural systems. Models of natural self-organization simulate the development and reproduction of living entities as an ongoing process of interaction between elements 'at the edge of chaos' (for example, the way genes interact in a Boolean regulatory network). Edge-of-chaos means that, when network structures are neither too rigid (to allow for novelty to emerge) nor too responsive (to prevent decay), they are able to reproduce themselves. Stability and change must be balanced, as happens in loosely coupled systems, where most changes in interaction will not cause the system to leave its present attractor, but some will move it to a new attractor.

Analogously, most communicative interaction amongst people takes place within a common interpretative framework (or what Stacey calls a 'theme'). However, when the communication network moves from one framework (attractor) to another one (new attractor), the possibility of misunderstanding allows for a radical change in theme. This perspective also highlights the fact that a large majority of communications take place in groups that share a common interpretative frame, thus ensuring stability of meaning. In contrast, cross-departmental communication often leads to misunderstanding, and, in some instances, to new meanings (knowledge creation). This perspective suggests that radical change in organizations towards a new coherent set of practices does not necessarily require steering by management, but can emerge from communicative interactions.