The Management Quarterly 18 (2007) 298 – 318
Complexity Leadership Theory: Shifting management from the
professional age for the knowledge period ☆
Mary Uhl-Bien a, ⁎, Russ Marion w, 1, Expenses McKelvey c, 2
Department of Management, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, P. U. Box 880491, Lincoln, EINE 68588-0491, USA b
Educational Leadership, College of Education, Clemson College or university, Clemson, SC 29631-0710, UNITED STATES c
The UCLA Anderson School of Management, 110 Westwood Plaza, Los Angeles, LOS ANGELES 90095-1481, UNITED STATES
Management models of the past century have already been products of top-down, bureaucratic paradigms. These types of models are eminently powerful for an economy premised on physical production but are not suitable for a even more knowledge-oriented economic system. Complexity technology suggests a different sort of paradigm to get leadership—one that frames command as a complicated interactive energetic from which adaptive outcomes (e. g., learning, innovation, and adaptability) come up. This article attracts from complexness science to formulate an overarching framework pertaining to the study of Complexity Leadership Theory, a command paradigm that focuses on allowing the learning, imaginative, and adaptive capacity of complex adaptable systems (CAS) within a context of knowledge-producing organizations. This kind of conceptual platform includes three entangled management roles (i. e., adaptive leadership, administrative leadership, and enabling leadership) that reveal a active relationship between bureaucratic, administrative functions of the organization and the emergent, simple dynamics of complex adaptive systems (CAS). © 2007 Elsevier Inc. All privileges reserved.
Keywords: Leadership; Complexness theory; Intricate adaptive systems (CAS); Expertise Era; Imagination; Adaptive businesses; Bureaucracy
As we advance more deeply in the expertise economy, the essential assumptions underlining much of precisely what is taught and practiced with the intention of management will be hopelessly away of date…Most of our assumptions about organization, technology and organization are in least 50 years old. They may have outlived their particular time. (Drucker, 1998, p. 162) We're in a know-how economy, nevertheless our managerial and governance systems are stuck inside the Industrial Time. It's coming back a whole new model. (Manville & Ober, 2003, January., p. 48)
A youthful version on this paper was presented at the National Academy of Supervision Meeting in New Orleans, August, 2005. ⁎ Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 402 472 2314.
Tel.: +1 864 656 5105.
Tel.: +1 310 825 7796.
1048-9843/$ -- see front matter © 2007 Elsevier Inc. Almost all rights set aside. doi: twelve. 1016/j. leaqua. 2007. apr. 002
M. Uhl-Bien ou al. as well as The Management Quarterly 18 (2007) 298–318
In accordance to Hitt (1998), " we are around the precipice of your epoch, ” in the midst of a new economic age, in which modern world organizations will be facing a complicated competitive scenery driven mainly by globalization and the technological revolution. This new age is about an economic system where know-how is a key commodity and the rapid development of knowledge and innovation is important to organizational survival (Bettis & Hitt, 1995; Boisot, 1998). Consistent with these alterations, much debate is going on in the management literature relating to challenges facing organizations within a transitioning universe (Barkema, Baum, & Mannix, 2002; Bettis & Hitt, 1995; Child & McGrath, 2001).
However, despite the fact that leadership is a key factor in if organizations fulfill these problems, we find very little explicit discourse on leadership types for the ability Era. Because noted simply by Davenport (2001), while it is becoming clear that the old type of leadership was formed to deal with an extremely different group of circumstances which is therefore of questionable significance to the modern day work environment, simply no clear alternate has come along to...
References: Achtenhagen, M., Melin, D., Mullern, Capital t., & Ericson, T. (2003). Leadership: The role of interactive strategizing. In A. Pettigrew R. Whittington L.
Allen, P. (2001). A complex devices approach to learning in adaptable networks. Worldwide Journal of Innovation Management, 5, 149−180.
Alvesson, Meters., & Sveningsson, S. (2003). The great vanishing act: Troubles in doing " leadership”. The Leadership Quarterly, 14, 359−381.
Arthur, Watts. B. (1989). The economy and complexity. In D. D. Stein (Ed. ), Lectures in the sciences of complexity, volume. 1 (pp. 713−740). Redwood City,
Ashby, W. R. (1960). Design for a brain, (2nd Education. ). Ny: Wiley.
Bak, P. (1996). How character works. New York: Copernicus.
Bamford, J. D., Gomes-Casseres, W., & Robinson, M. S i9000. (2002). Understanding alliance strategy. San Francisco, FLORIDA: Jossey Bass.
Barkema, L. G., Azyklischer, zusammenhangender graph, J. A. C., & Mannix, Electronic. A. (2002). Management difficulties in a new time. Schools of Administration Journal, 45(5),
Barnard, C. I. (1938). The functions of the executive. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and satisfaction beyond expectations. New York: Totally free Press.
Bedeian, A. G., & Look, J. G. (2006). Educational amnesia and vestigial assumptions of our ancestors and forefathers. The Management Quarterly, 17(2), 190−205.
Bennis, W. G. (1996). Learning to be a leader of leaders. In R. Gibson (Ed. ), Rethinking the near future. London: Brealey.
Bettis, 3rd there�s r. A., & Hitt, Meters. A. (1995). The new competitive landscape. Strategic Management Log, 7(13), 7−19.
Bluedorn, A. C., Manley, R. A., Cartwright, D. K., & Barringer, W. R. (1994). The software and convergence of the strategic management and
organizational environment domains
Boal, K., & Schlultz, L. (2007). Storytelling, time, and evolution: The role of strategic leadership in complicated adaptive devices. The Leadership
Quarterly, 18, 411−428 (this issue)
Boal, K., Whitehead, C. T., Phillips, L., & Search, J. (1992). Strategic command: A multiorganizational-level perspective. Westport, CT: Quorum.
Boisot, M. H. (1998). Knowledge property: Securing competitive advantage inside the information economic system. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bonabeau, E., & Meyer, C. (2001). Swarm cleverness: A whole new way to consider business. Harvard Business Assessment, 79(5), 107−114.
Bradbury, L., & Lichtenstein, B. (2000). Relationality in organizational research: Exploring the space between. Corporation Science, 11, 551−564.
Carley, K. (1997). Organizational version. Annals of Operation Study, 75, 25−47.
Carley, E., & Hill, V. (2001). Structural transform and learning within organizations. In A. Lomi & Electronic. R. Larsen (Eds. ), Dynamics of organizational
Carley, K., & Lee, M. S. (1998). Dynamic businesses: Organizational edition in a changing environment. Advances in Proper Management: A
Research Annual, 15, 269−297.
Carley, K., & Ren, Y. (2001). Tradeoffs among performance and adaptability for c3i architectures (part of the A2C2 project backed in part by the
Office of Naval Research)
Carley, K., & Svoboda, D. M. (1996). Modeling organizational version as a simulated annealing process. Sociological Methods and Analysis, 25
Child, J., & McGrath, L. G. (2001). Organizations unfettered: Organizational contact form in an information-intensive economy. The Academy of
Management Journal, 44(6), 1135−1149.
Cilliers, G. (1998). Complexity and postmodernism: Understanding sophisticated systems. Greater london: Routledge.
Cilliers, P. (2001). Boundaries, hierarchies and sites in complex systems. Intercontinental Journal of Innovation Managing, 5, 135−147.
Cohen, M. D., March, J. G., & Olsen, J. L. (1972). A garbage may model of organizational choice. Management Science Quarterly, 17, 1−25.
Conger, T. A. (1999). Charismatic and transformational management in organizations: An insider 's point of view on these developing avenues of exploration.
Coveney, L. (2003). Self-organization and complexity: A new age for theory, computation and experiment. Daily news presented on the Nobel conference, seminar
Cusumano, Meters. (2001). Centering creativity: Microsoft company 's " synch and stabilize” method of software product development. In I actually. Nonaka & T.
Davenport, T. L. (2001). Know-how work and the future of supervision. In T. G. Bennis G. Meters. Spreitzer & T. G. Cummings (Eds. ), The future of
leadership: Today 's leading leadership thinkers speak to another day 's leaders (pp
Time, D. V. (2000). Command development: A review in context. The Management Quarterly, 11(4), 581−613.
Dooley, K. L. (1996, 10. 26. 96). Complex adaptable systems: A nominal explanation. Retrieved Sept, 2006, via http://www.eas.asu.edu/~kdooley/
Dougherty, D. (1996). Organizing intended for innovation. In S. L. Clegg C. Hardy & W. Nord (Eds. ), Handbook of organization studies (pp. 424−439).
Dougherty, G., & Robust, C. (1996). Sustained item innovation in large, adult organizations: Defeating innovation-to-organization complications.
Academy of Management Diary, 39, 1120−1153.
Drath, T. (2001). The deep green sea: Rethinking the source of leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass and Center pertaining to Creative Command.
Drucker, S. F. (1998). Management 's new paradigms (cover story). Forbes, 162(7), 152−170.
Drucker, P. Farrenheit. (1999). Supervision challenges for the modern world. New York: HarperCollins.
Eisenhardt, T. (1989). Producing fast strategic decisions in high-velocity surroundings. Academy of Management Journal, 32, 543−576.
Finkelstein, T., & Hambrick, D. C. (1996). Tactical leadership: Best executives and their effects about organizations. St . Paul, MN: West Creating Co.
Fletcher, J. T. (2004). The paradox of postheroic leadership: An dissertation on male or female, power, and transformational modify. Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 12-15
Goodwin, B. (1994). How the leopard changed its spots: The evolution of complexity. Nyc: Charles Scribner 's Daughters.
Gronn, P. (1999). A realist view of management. Paper offered at the educational leaders intended for the new millenium-leaders with spirit. ELO-AusAsia
On the web Conference.
Gronn, P. (2002). Distributed leadership as a device of analysis. The Leadership Quarterly, 13, 423−451.
Guastello, S i9000. (2007). Nonlinear dynamics and leadership beginning. The Command Quarterly, 18, 357−369 (this issue). doi: 10. 1016/j.
Halal, W. E. (Ed. ). (1998). The infinite resource: Learning the never-ending power of knowledge. New York: Jossey-Bass.
Halal, W. E. & Taylor, E. B. (Eds. ). (1999). Twenty-first hundred years economics: Viewpoints of socioeconomics for a changing world. New York:
Hales, C. (2002). ‘bureaucracy-lite' and continuities in managerial function. British Log of Supervision, vol. 13: Blackwell Posting Limited,
Hazy, M. (2007). Pc models of command: Foundations for a new self-discipline or meaningless diversion? The Leadership Quarterly, 18, 391−410
Heckscher, C. (1994). Understanding the post-bureaucratic type. In C. Heckscher & A. Donnellon (Eds. ), The post-bureaucratic corporation: New
points of views on organizational change
Hedlund, G. (1994). A model expertise management and the N-form corporation. Strategic Management Journal, 12-15, 73−90.
Heifetz, R. A. (1994). Command without convenient answers.: Cambridge Harvard College or university Press.
Heifetz, R. A., & Laurie, D. L. (2001). The effort of leadership. Harvard Organization Review, 79(11), 131−141.
Heifetz, R. A., & Linsky, M. (2002). Leadership at risk: Staying alive through the perils of leading. Boston: Harvard School Press.
Henrickson, L., & McKelvey, M. (2002). Fundamentals of new cultural science: Institutional legitimacy from philosophy, difficulty science,
postmodernism, and agent-based modeling
Hernes, G. (1998). Real virtuality. In L. Hedström & R. Swedberg (Eds. ), Social mechanisms: An conditional approach to sociable theory (pp. 74−101).
Hitt, M. A. (1998). President address: Twenty-first century companies: Business organizations, business colleges, and the school. The Academy of
Managing Review, 23, 218−224.
Hogue, M., & Lord, 3rd there�s r. G. (2007). A multilevel, complexity theory approach to understanding gender tendency in management. The Management Quarterly,
The netherlands, J. H. (1995). Hidden order. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Business.
Homans, G. C. (1950). The human group. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World.
Hosking, D. M. (1988). Managing, leadership and skilful method. Journal of Management Research, 25, 147−166.
House, R. J., & Mitchell, T. (1974). A path-goal theory of head effectiveness. Log of Contemporary Organization, 81−97.
Howell, J. M., & Boies, K. (2004). Champions of technological innovation: The influence of contextual know-how, role orientation, idea technology,