Leadership is about influencing behavior. Influencing people to change customary ways of behaving is a great leadership challenge. Leadership theories emphasize the role of the leader as an agent or initiator of change. A number of attempts have been made to understand organizational change. Often, these attempts have sought a rational model with predictive value, or, at the least, some explicative value.
In this paper we propose an argument which leads to the use of previously developed axes along which organizations may change. We propose that these axes form the basis of a space and that the organization can be represented as a point in this multidimensional space. The dynamics of organizational change can then be modeled as time-dependent movement in this space. In organizations, these dynamics will resemble those of simple, irreversible, dynamic physical systems. In more complex systems, the dynamics will become extremely dependent on initial conditions and hence are "chaotic" in nature.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Abrahamson, Eric. (1996). Management fashion. Academy of Management Review. 21(l),254-285.
2.
Ackoff, R.L. (1982). Our changing concept of planning. The Journal of Nursing Administration. October: 35-40.
3.
Anderson, J.P. & Duncan, W.J. (1977). The scientific significance of the paradox in administrative theory. Management InternationalReview.17:99-106.
4.
Anderson, P. & Tushman, M. (1991). Managing through cycles of technological change. Research TechnologyManagement, 34: 26-31.
Bateson, G. (1976). Steps to an ecology of mind. New York: Ballantine.
9.
Bateson, G. (1991). A sacred unity: Further steps to an ecology of mind. New York: Cornelia & Michael Bessie Book.
10.
Blalock, H.M. (1989). The real and unrealized contributions of quantitative sociology, American Sociological Review, 54: 447-460.
11.
Bourgeois, L.J. (1984). Strategic management and determinism. Academy of Management Review. 9(4): 586-596.
12.
Burgleman, R.A. (1983). A model of interaction of strategic behavior, corporate context and the concept of strategy. Academy of Management Review. 8(1): 61-70.
13.
Burns, T. & Stalker, G.M. (1984/ 1961). The management of innovation. Reprinted in Tosi, H.L. Theories of organization. New York : John Wiley & Sons.
14.
Cameron, K.S. (1986). Effectiveness as paradox: Consensus and conflict in conceptions of organizational effectiveness. Management Science.32(5): 589-553.
15.
Cameron, K.S. & Quinn, R.E. (1988). Organizational paradox and transformation. In Quinn, R.E. and Cameron, K.S. (eds.) Paradox and transformation: Toward a theory of change in organization management. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
16.
Conger, J.A.1989. The charismatic leader: Behind the mystique of exceptional leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass .
17.
Conger, J.A. & Kanungo, R.N.1987. Toward a behavioral theory of charismatic leadership in organizational settings. Academy of Management Review, 12(5): 6;37-647.
18.
Daft, R.L. & Weick, K.E. (1984). Toward a model of organizations and interpretation systems. Academy of Management Review. 9(2): 284-295.
19.
Dutton, J.E. & Duncan, R.B. (1987). The creation of momentum for change through the process of strategic issue diagnosis. Strategic Management Journal. 8(3): 279-295.
20.
Economist. ( 1994). Balancing Broomsticks. June 25: 85-86.
Fiol, C.M. & Lyles, M.A. (1985). Organizational learning. Academy of Management Review. 10(4.): 803-813.
23.
Ford, J.D. & Backoff, R.H. (1988). Organizational change in and out of dualities and paradox. In Quinn, R.E. and Cameron, K.S. (eds.) Paradox and Transformation: Toward a Theory of Change in Organization Management. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
24.
Fulmer, R.M. & Gibbs, P. (1998). The second generation learning organizations: New tools for sustaining competitive advantage. Organizational Dynamics, 27(1), 7-20.
25.
Ginsberg, A. (1988). Measuring and modeling changes in strategy: Theoretical foundations and empirical directions. Strategic Management Journal, 9(6), 559-575.
26.
Gleick, J. (1987). Chaos: Making a new science. New York: Penguin Books.
27.
Gray, B. & Ariss, S.S. (1985). Politics and strategic change across organizational life cycles. Academy of Management Review. 10(4): 707-723.
28.
Gregersen, H., Morrison, A., & Black, J. (1998). Developing leaders for the global
29.
frontier. Sloan Management Review, 40(1), 21-32.
30.
Gregersen, H. & Sailer, L. (1993). Chaos theory and its implications for social science research. Human Relations. 46(7): 777-802.
31.
Hambrick, D.C. (1981). Environment, strategy, and power within top management teams. Administrative Science Quarterly,26: 253-276.
32.
Handy, C. (1994), The age of paradox. Harvard Business School Press: Boston, MA.
33.
Hannan, M.T. & Freeman, J. ( 1984). Structural inertia and organizational change . American Sociological Review, 49(1): 149-164.
34.
Hedberg, B.L.T., Nystrom, P.C. & Starbuck, W.H. (1976). Camping on seesaws: Prescriptions for a self-designing organization. Administrative Science Quarterly21(1): 41-65.
35.
Hess, B. & Mikhailov, A. (1994). Self-organization in living cells. Science. 264: 223-224.
36.
Huff, J.O., Huff, A.S. & Thomas, H. (1992). Strategic renewal and the interaction of cumulative stress and inertia. Strategic Management Journal. 13(1): 55-75.
37.
Kauffman, R.G. & Olivia, T.A. (1994). Multivariate catastrophe model estimation: Method and application. Academy of Management Journal, 37(1): 206-22l.
38.
Kelly, D. & Amburgey, T.L. (1991). Organizational inertia and momentum: A dynamic model of strategic change. Academy of Management Journal, 34(5): 591-612.
39.
Kerlinger, F.N. (1986). Foundations of behavioral research. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
40.
Kets de Vries, M.F.R. & Miller, D. (1989). The neurotic organization. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
41.
Leonard-Barton, D. (1992). Core capabilities and core rigidities: A paradox in managing new product development. Strategic Management Journal, 13(20): 111-125.
42.
Lei, D., Slocum, J., & Pitts, R. (1999). Designing organizations for competitive advantage: The power of unlearning and learning. Organizational Dynamics , 27(3), 2438.
43.
Loye, D., & Eisler, R. (1987). Chaos and transformation: Implications of nonequilibrium theory for social science and society." Behavioral Science32( 1 ): 53-66.
Miles, R.E. & Snow, C.C. (1978). Organizational strategy, structure, and process . New York: McGraw-Hill.
46.
Miller, D. (1986). Relating Porter's business strategies to environment and structure. Academy of Management Journal, 31(2):280308.
47.
Miller, D. (1988). Configurations of strategy and structure. Strategic Management Journal, 6(3): 288-249.
48.
Miller, D. (1990). The Icarus paradox. New York : HarperBusiness.
49.
Miller, D. (1992). The generic strategy trap. Journal of Business Strategy. Jan/Feb: 37-41.
50.
Miller, D. (1993). The architecture of simplicity. Academy of Management Journal. 18(1): 116-138.
51.
Miller, D. & Friesen, P.H. (1978). Archetypes of strategy formulation. Management Science, 24.(9): 921-933.
52.
Miller, D. & Friesen, P.H. (1980a). Momentum and revolution in organizational adaptation . Academy of Management Journal. 23(4): 591-614.
53.
Miller, D. & Friesen, P.H. (1980b). Archetypes or organizational transition. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25(2): 268299.
54.
Miller, D. & Friesen, P.H. (1982). The longitudinal analysis of organizations: A methodological perspective. Management Science.28(9): 1013-1034.
55.
Miller, D. & Friesen, P.H. (1984). Organizations: A quantum view. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
56.
Mintzberg, H. (1979). The structuring of organizations. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.
57.
Mintzberg, H. & Westley, F. (1992). Cycles of organizational change. Strategic Management Journal. 13(l): 39-59.
58.
Monge, P.R. (1990). Theoretical and analytical issues in studying organizational processes. Organizational Science, 1(4): 406-430.
59.
Morgan, G. (1986). Images of organization. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.
60.
Nadler, D.A. & Tushman, M.L. (1989). Organizational frame bending: Principles for managing reorientation. Academy of Management Review, 3(3): 194-205.
61.
Northouse, P.G. (1997). Leadership: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
62.
Perrow, C. (1984). Normal accidents: Living with high risk technology . New York: Basic Books.
63.
Pettigrew, A.M. (1990). Longitudinal field research on change: Theory and practice. Organizational Science, 1(3): 267-292.
64.
Peters, Tom. (1992). Liberation management. New York: Knopf.
65.
Peters, Tom. (1988). Thriving on chaos. New York : Knopf.
66.
Pfeffer, J. & Salancik, G. (1978). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. New York: Harper & Row.
67.
Porter, M.E. (1980). Competitive strategy. New York : Free Press.
68.
Priesmeyer, H.R. & Baik, K. (1989). A potential new planning tool: Discovering the patterns of chaos. Planning Review, Nov/Dec: 14-21, 47.
69.
Prigogine, I. (1988). Origins of complexity. In Fabian, A.C. (ed). Origins. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
70.
Prigogine, I. & Stengers, I. (1984). Order out of chaos. New York : Bantam.
71.
Quinn, R.E. (1988). Beyond rational management: Mastering the paradoxes and competing demands of high performance. San Francisco : Jossey-Bass.
72.
Quinn, R.E. & Rohrbaugh, J. (1983). A spatial model of effectiveness criteria: Towards a competing values approach to organizational analysis. Management Science, 29(3): 363-377.
73.
Romanelli, E. & Tushman, M.L. (1986). Inertia, environments, and strategic choice: A Quasi-experimental design for comparative-longitudinal research. Management Science, 32(5): 608-621.
74.
Sewell, W.H. (1992). A theory of structure: Duality, agency, and transformation . American Journal of Sociology, 98(1): 1-29.
75.
Smith, K.K. (1982). Philosophical problems in thinking about organizational change. In Goodman, P.S. and Associates (eds.). Change in organizations: New perspectives on theory, research, and practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Tushman, M.L., Newman, W.H., & Romanelli, E. (1986). Convergence and upheaval: managing the unsteady pace of organizational evolution. California Management Review . 29(l): 29-44.
