Self-organizing systems are social systems which are immanently and constantly recreated by agents. In a self-organizing system, agents make changes while preserving stability. If they do not preserve stability, they push the system toward chaos and cannot recreate it. How changes preserve stability is thus a fundamental issue. In current works, changes preserve stability because agents’ ability to make changes is limited by interaction rules and power. However, how agents diffuse the changes throughout the system while preserving its stability has not been addressed in these works. We have addressed this issue by borrowing from a complex system theory neglected thus far in organization theories: self-organized criticality theory. We suggest that self-organizing systems are in critical states: agents have equivalent ability to make changes, and none are able to foresee or control how their changes diffuse throughout the system. Changes, then, diffuse unpredictably – they may diffuse to small or large parts of the system or not at all, and it is this unpredictable diffusion that preserves stability in the system over time. We call our theoretical framework self-organizing criticality theory. It presents a new treatment of change and stability and improves the understanding of self-organizing.
AccardP. (2015) Complex Hierarchy: The Strategic Advantages of a Trade-off between Hierarchical Supervision and Self-Organizing, European Management Journal, 3, 89–103.
2.
AccardP.AssensC. (2014). The spontaneity of social networks: A possibility for re-enchanting network study?Journal of Organizational Change Management, 27, 965–1007.
3.
AshmosD. P.DuchonD.McDanielR. R.Jr. (2000). Organizational response to complexity: The effect on organizational performance. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 13, 577–594.
4.
AshmosD. P.DuchonD.McDanielR. R.JrHuonkerJ. W. (2002). What a mess! Participation as simple managerial rule to ‘complexify’ organizations. Journal of Management Studies, 39, 189–206.
5.
Ashmos PlowmanD.BakerL. T.BeckT. E.KulkarniM.SolanskyS. T.Villarreal TravisD. T. (2007a). Radical change accidentally: The emergence and amplification of small change. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 515–543.
6.
Ashmos PlowmanD.SolanskyS. T.BeckT. E.BakerL. T.KulkarniM.Villarreal TravisD. T. (2007b). The role of leadership in emergent, self-organization. Leadership Quarterly, 18, 341–356.
7.
BakP.TangC.WiesenfeldK. (1987). Self-organized criticality: An explanation of the 1/
f noise. Physical Review Letters, 59, 381.
8.
BakP.TangC.WiesenfeldK. (1988). Self-organized criticality. Physical Review A, 38, 364.
9.
BergerP.LuckmannT. (1966). The social construction of reality. New York: Anchor Press.
10.
Bergman-LichtensteinB. M. (2000). Emergence as a process of self-organizing. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 13, 526–544.
11.
BoisotM.ChildJ. (1999). Organizations as adaptive systems in complex environments: The case of China. Organization Science, 10, 237–252.
12.
ChildJ.RodriguezS. B. (2011). How organizations engage with external complexity: A political action perspective. Organization Studies, 32, 803–824.
13.
DrazinR. E.SandelandsL. E. (1992). Autogenesis: A perspective on the process of organizing. Organization Science, 3, 230–249.
14.
FriggR. (2003). Self-organized criticality – what it is and what it isn’t. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 3, 613–632.
15.
FuchsC. (2002). Some implications of Anthony Giddens’ works for a theory of social self-organization. Emergence, 4(3), 7–36.
16.
GarudRGehmanJ.KumaraswamyA. (2011). Complexity arrangement for sustaining innovation: Lessons from 3M. Organization Studies, 32, 737–767.
17.
GoldspinkC.KayR. (2005). Bridging the micro-macro divide: A new basis for social science. Human Relations, 57, 597–618.
18.
GoldspinkC.KayR. (2010). Emergence in organizations: The reflexive turn. Emergence: Complexity and Organization, 12(3), 47–63.
19.
GraetzF.SmithA. C. T. (2011). Philosophies of organizational change. Edward Elgar, Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.
20.
HedbergB. L. T.NyströmP. C.StarbuckW. H. (1976). Camping on seesaws: Prescription for a self-designing organization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21, 41–65.
21.
HernesT.BakkenT. (2003). Implications of self-reference: Niklas Luhmann’s autopoiesis and organization theory. Organization Studies, 24, 1511–1535.
22.
HernesT.WeikE. (2007). Organization as process: Drawing a line between endogenous and exogenous views. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 23, 252–264.
23.
HussenotA.MissonierS. (2016). Encompassing stability and novelty in organization studies: An events-based approach. Organization Studies, 37, 523–546.
24.
HutchinsE. (1991). Organizing work by adaptation. Organization Science, 2, 14–39.
25.
HutchinsE. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
26.
KauffmanS. (1993). The origins of order. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
27.
KauffmanS. (1995). At home in the universe: The search for the laws of complexity and order. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
28.
KickertW. J. M. (1993). Autopoiesis and the science of (public)administration: Essence, sense, and nonsense. Organization Studies, 14, 261–278.
29.
KogutB. (2000). The network as knowledge: Generative rules and the emergence of structures. Strategic Management Journal, 21, 405–425.
30.
MaddenL. T.DuchonD.MaddenT.Ashmos PlowmanD. (2012). Emergent organizational capacity for compassion. Academy of Management Review, 37, 689–708.
OsbornR. N.HuntJ. G. J. (2007). Leadership and the choice of order: Complexity and hierarchical perspective near the edge of chaos. Leadership Quarterly, 18, 319–340.
33.
RommeG. L. (1999a). Domination, self-determination and circular organizing. Organization Studies, 20, 801–831.
34.
RommeG. L. (1999b). Work, authority and participation: The scenario of circular organizing. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 10, 156–166.
35.
SchreyöggG.SydowJ. (2010). Organizing for fluidity? Dilemmas of new organizational forms. Organization Science, 21, 1251–1262.
36.
StaceyR. (1995). The science of complexity: An alternative perspective for strategic change processes. Strategic Management Journal, 16, 477–495.
37.
ThietartR. A. (2016). Strategy dynamics: Agency, path dependency, and self-organized emergence. Strategic Management Journal, 37, 774–792.
TsoukasH. (1996). The firm as a distributed knowledge system: A constructionist approach. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 11–25.
41.
TsoukasH. (1998). Chaos, complexity and organization theory. Organization, 5, 291–313.
42.
TsoukasH. (2017). Don’t simplify, complexify: From disjunctive to conjunctive theorizing in organization and management studies. Journal of Management Studies, 54, 132–156.
TsoukasH.DooleyK. J. (2011). Introduction to the Special Issue: Toward the ecological style: Embracing complexity in organizational research. Organization Studies, 32, 729–735.
45.
TsoukasH.HatchM. J. (2001). Complex thinking, complex practice: The case for a narrative approach to organization complexity. Human Relations, 54, 979–1013.
46.
Van de VenA. H.PooleM. S. (2005). Alternative approaches for studying organizational change. Organization Studies, 26, 1377–1404.
47.
WeickK. E. (1977). Organization design: Organizations as self-designing systems. Organizational Dynamics, autumn, 31–46.
48.
WeickK. E. (1979). The social psychology of organizing. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
49.
WeickK. E. (1993). The collapse of sensemaking in organizations: The Mann Gulch disaster. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 628–652.
50.
WeickK. E.QuinnR. E. (1999). Organizational change and development. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 361–386.
51.
WilhoitE. D.KisselburgL. G. (2015). Collective action without organization: The material constitution of bike commuters as collective. Organization Studies, 36, 573–592.
