Organizations face the reality of needing to work with other organizations to share resources and responsibilities in pursuit of common goals. However, there is limited research regarding the complex nature of meta-organizations. Our purpose is to identify how a meta-organization team operates. We define a meta-organization team and rely on complexity theory to explain the dynamics within the meta-organization team we observed. Based on our analysis, this team was exposed to competing tensions that forced the team into a far-from-equilibrium state and allowed the team to be effective. We propose two types of tensions on complex systems: destabilizing and stabilizing. These tensions keep a system between the boundaries of equilibrium and chaos. As a result of this study, we provide details of key findings and implications of these tensions.
AlderferC (1977) Group and intergroup relations. In: HackmanJSuttleJ (eds) Improving Life at Work. Palisades, CA: Goodyear, 227–296.
2.
AldrichHPfefferJ (1976) Environments of organizations. Annual Review of Sociology2: 79–105.
3.
AldrichHWhettenD (1981) Organization sets, action sets, and networks: Making the most of simplicity. In: NystromPStarbuckW (eds) Handbook of Organizational Design. New York: Oxford University Press, 385–408.
4.
AndersonR (1967) A Sociometric Approach to the Analysis of Interorganizational Relationships. East Lansing, MI: Institute for Community Development, Michigan State University.
5.
AndersonR (1999) Complexity theory and organization science. Organization Science10(3): 216–232.
6.
BakP (1996) How Nature Works: The Science of Self-Organized Criticality. New York: Copernicus.
7.
BenklerY (2006) The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
8.
BergerICunninghamPDrumwrightM (2004) Social alliances. California Management Review47(1): 58–90.
BrownSEisenhardtK (1998) Competing on the Edge: Strategy as Structured Chaos. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
11.
ButterfieldKReedRLemarkD (2004) An inductive model of collaboration from the stakeholder’s perspective. Business & Society43(2): 162–195.
12.
ChilesTMeyerAHenchT (2004) Organizational emergence: The origin and transformation of Branson, Missouri’s musical theaters. Organization Science15(5): 499–519.
13.
CilliersP (2000) Rules and complex systems. Emergence2(3): 40–50.
14.
ConnellyBMillerTDeversC (2012) Under a cloud of suspicion: Trust, distrust, and their effect in interorganizational contracting. Strategic Management Journal33(7): 820–833.
15.
CookK (1977) Exchange and power in networks of interorganizational relations. The Sociological Quarterly18(1): 62–82.
16.
CramtonC (2001) The mutual knowledge problem and its consequences for dispersed collaboration. Organization Science12(3): 346–371.
17.
CramtonCHindsP (2005) Subgroup dynamics in internationally distributed teams: Ethnocentrism or cross-national learning? In: StawBKramerR (eds) Research in Organizational Behavior, vol. 26. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 231–263.
18.
DuttonJDukerichJ (1991) Keeping an eye on the mirror: Image and identity in organizational adaptation. Academy of Management Journal34(3): 517–554.
19.
EisenhardtK (1989) Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review14(4): 532–550.
20.
EspinosaJCummingsJWilsonJPearceB (2003) Team boundary issues across multiple global firms. Journal of Management Information Systems19(4): 157–190.
21.
GrayB (2000) Assessing inter-organizational collaboration: Multiple conceptions and multiple methods. In: FaulkenerDDeRondM (eds) Cooperative Strategy: Economic, Business, and Organizational Issues. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 243–260.
22.
GriffithTNealeM (2001) Information processing in traditional, hybrid, and distributed teams: From nascent knowledge to transactive memory. In: SuttonRStawB (eds) Research in Organizational Behavior, vol. 23. Stamford, CT: JAI Press, 379–421.
23.
GuetzkowH (1966) Relations among organizations. In: BowersR (ed.) Studies on Behavior in Organizations. Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press, 13–41.
24.
GulatiR (1995) Does familiarity breed trust? The implications of repeated ties for contractual choice in alliances. Academy of Management Journal28(1): 85–112.
25.
GulatiR (1998) Alliances and networks. Strategic Management Journal19(4): 293–317.
26.
GulatiRSinghH (1998) The architecture of cooperation: Managing coordination costs and appropriation concerns in strategic alliances. Administrative Science Quarterly43(4): 781–814.
GulatiRPuranamPTushmanM (2012) Meta-organization design: Rethinking design in interorganizational and community contexts. Strategic Management Journal33(6): 571–586.
29.
HackmanJ (1987) The design of work teams. In: LorschJ (ed.) Handbook of Organizational Behavior. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 315–342.
30.
HackmanJ (1990) Groups that Work and Those that Don’t. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
31.
HackmanJ (2002) Leading Teams: Setting the Stage for Great Performances. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
32.
HardyCLawrenceTPhillipsN (2006) Swimming with sharks: Creating strategic change through multi-sector collaboration. International Journal of Strategic Change Management1(1–2): 96–112.
33.
HittMDacinMLevitasEArregleJBorzaA (2000) Partner selection in emerging and developed market contexts: Resource-based and organizational learning perspectives. Academy of Management Journal43(3): 449–467.
34.
HollandJ (1988) The global economy as an adaptive system. In: AndersonPArrowKPinesD (eds) The Economy as an Evolving Complex System. Redwood City, CA: Addison-Wesley, 117–124.
35.
IdemudiaU (2008) Conceptualising the CSR and development debate: Bridging existing analytical gaps. Journal of Corporate Citizenship29: 91–110.
36.
JamaliDKeshishianT (2009) Uneasy alliances: Lessons learned from partnerships between businesses and NGOs in the context of CSR. Journal of Business Ethics84(2): 277–295.
37.
JeppesenLLakhaniK (2010) Marginality and problem-solving effectiveness in broadcast search. Organization Science21(5): 1016–1033.
38.
KauffmanS (1993) The Origins of Order. New York: Oxford University Press.
39.
KauffmanS (1995) At Home in the Universe: The Search for the Laws of Self-organization and Complexity. New York: Oxford University Press.
40.
KernTWillcocksL (2000) Exploring information technology outsourcing relationships: Theory and practice. Journal of Strategic Information Systems9(4): 321–350.
41.
KirkmanBMathieuJ (2005) The dimensions and antecedents of team virtuality. Journal of Management31(5): 700–718.
42.
KoschmannMKuhnTPfarrerM (2012) A communicative framework of value in cross-sector partnerships. Academy of Management Review37(3): 332–354.
43.
LauDMurnighanJ (1998) Demographic diversity and faultlines: The compositional dynamics of organizational groups. Academy of Management Review23(2): 325–340.
44.
LawrenceTHardyCPhillipsN (2002) Institutional effects of interorganizational collaboration: The emergence of proto-institutions. Academy of Management Journal45(1): 281–290.
45.
LevineSWhiteP (1961) Exchange as a conceptual framework for the study of interorganizational relationships. Administrative Science Quarterly5(4): 583–601.
46.
LevinthalD (1997) Adaptation on rugged landscapes. Management Science43(7): 934–950.
47.
LewinR (2000) Complexity: Life at the Edge of Chaos. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
48.
Lund-ThomsenP (2008) The global sourcing and codes of conduct debate: Five myths and five recommendations. Development and Change39(6): 1005–1018.
49.
McKelveyB (1999) Avoiding complexity catastrophe in coevolutionary pockets: Strategies for rugged landscapes. Organization Science10(3): 294–321.
50.
McKelveyB (2001) Energising order-creating networks of distributed intelligence: Improving the corporate brain. International Journal of Innovation Management5(2): 181–212.
51.
McKelveyB (2004) Toward a 0th law of thermodynamics: Order creation complexity dynamics from physics and biology to bioeconomics. Bioeconomics6(1): 65–96.
52.
McPhersonJRanger-MooreJ (1991) Evolution on a dancing landscape: Organizations and networks in dynamic Blau space. Social Forces70(1): 19–42.
53.
MaguireSMcKelveyB (1999) Complexity and management: Moving from fad to firm foundations. Emergence1(2): 19–61.
54.
MaruyamaM (1963) The second cybernetics: Deviation amplifying mutual causal processes. American Science51(2): 164–179.
55.
MatthewsKWhiteMLongR (1999) Why study complexity science in social sciences. Human Relations52(4): 439–462.
56.
MayerKArgyresN (2004) Learning to contract: Evidence from the personal computer industry. Organization Science15(4): 394–410.
57.
MaznevskiMChudobaK (2000) Bridging space over time: Global virtual-team dynamics and effectiveness. Organization Science11(5): 473–492.
58.
MesquitaL (2007) Starting over when the bickering never ends: Rebuilding aggregate trust among clustered firms through trust facilitators. Academy of Management Review32(1): 72–91.
59.
MilesMHubermanA (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. Thousand Oak, CA: SAGE.
60.
MillerCCardinalLGlickW (1997) Retrospective reports in organizational research: A reexamination of recent evidence. Academy of Management Journal40(1): 189–204.
61.
NelsonJZadekS (2000) Partnership Alchemy: New Social Partnerships in Europe. Copenhagen: Copenhagen Centre.
62.
NicolisGPrigogineI (1989) Exploring Complexity: An Introduction. New York: Freeman.
PascaleRMaguireM (1980) Comparison of selected work factors in Japan and the United States. Human Relations33(7): 433–455.
65.
PlowmanDBakerLBeckTKulkarniMSolanskySTravisD (2007a) Radical change accidentally: The emergence and amplification of small change. Academy of Management Journal50(3): 515–543.
66.
PlowmanDSolanskySBeckTBakerLKulkarniMTravisD (2007b) The role of leadership in emergent, self-organization. Leadership Quarterly18(4): 341–356.
67.
PolzerJCrispCJarvenpaaSKimJ (2006) Extending the faultline model to geographically dispersed teams: How collocated subgroups can impair group functioning. Academy of Management Journal49(4): 679–692.
68.
PrigogineIStengersI (1984) Order out of Chaos: Man’s New Dialogue with Nature. Boulder, CO: New Science Library.
69.
ProvanKMilwardH (1995) A preliminary theory of interorganizational network effectiveness: A comparative study of four community mental health systems. Administrative Science Quarterly40(1): 1–33.
70.
ReuerJ (2004) Strategic Alliances: Theory and Evidence. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
71.
SalasEDickensonTConverseSTannebaumS (1992) Toward an understanding of team performance and training. In: SwezeyRSalasE (eds) Teams: Their Training and Performance. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 3–29.
72.
SchoplerJ (1987) Inter-organizational groups: Origins, structures, and outcomes. Academy of Management Review12(4): 702–713.
73.
SeitanidiM (2008) Adaptive responsibilities: Non-linear interactions in cross sector social partnerships. Emergence: Complexity & Organization10(3): 51–64.
74.
SelskyJParkerB (2005) Cross-sector partnerships to address social issues: Challenges to theory and practice. Journal of Management31(6): 849–873.
75.
SimonH (1951) A formal theory of the employment relationship. Econometrica19(3): 293–305.
76.
StaceyR (1992) Managing the Unknowable. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
77.
StaceyR (1995) The science of complexity: An alternative perspective for strategic change processes. Strategic Management Journal16(6): 477–495.
78.
SteinerI (1972) Group Process and Productivity. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
79.
StockR (2006) Inter-organizational teams as boundary spanners between supplier and customer companies. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science34(4): 588–599.
80.
StoneM (2000) Exploring the effects of collaborations on member organizations: Washington County’s Welfare-to-Work Partnership. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly29(suppl. 1): 98–119.
81.
TakahashiLSmutnyG (2002) Collaborative windows and organizational governance: Exploring the formation and demise of social service partnerships. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly31(2): 165–185.
82.
TautzJHeilmannH (2008) The Buzz about the Bees: Biology of a Superorganism. Berlin, Germany: Springer.
83.
TsoukasH (1998) Introduction: Chaos, complexity, and organization theory. Organization5(3): 291–313.
84.
TsoukasHHatchM (2001) Complex thinking, complex practice: The case for a narrative approach to organizational complexity. Human Relations54(8): 979–1013.
85.
TurcotteMPasqueroJ (2001) The paradox of multistakeholder collaborative roundtables. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science37(4): 447–464.
86.
TurkH (1973) Comparative urban structure from an interorganizational perspective. Administrative Science Quarterly18(1): 37–55.
87.
TywoniakS (2007) Knowledge in four deformation dimensions. Organization14(1): 53–76.
88.
Van de VenAWalkerG (1984) The dynamics of interorganizational coordination. Administrative Science Quarterly29(4): 598–621.
89.
VanhaverbekeW (2006) The interorganizational context of open innovation. In: ChesbroughHVanhaverbekeWWestJ (eds) Open Innovation: Researching a New Paradigm. New York: Oxford University Press, 205–219.
90.
Von HippelE (1988) The Sources of Innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.
91.
WaddockS (1989) Understanding social partnerships: An evolutionary model of partnership organizations. Administration & Society21(1): 78–100.
92.
WaddockS (1991) A typology of social partnership organizations. Administration & Society22(4): 480–515.
93.
WagemanRHackmanJLehmanE (2005) Team diagnostic survey: Development of an instrument. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science41(4): 373–398.
94.
WettenhallR (2003) The rhetoric and reality of public-private partnerships. Public Organization Review3(1): 77–107.
95.
WheatleyM (1999) Leadership and the New Science. San Francisco, CA: Berett-Koehler.
ZengMChenX (2003) Achieving cooperation in multiparty alliances: A social dilemma approach to partnership management. Academy of Management Review28(4): 587–605.
