IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/hig/fsight/v14y2020i4p34-45.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Strategies of Dynamic Complexity Management

Author

Listed:
  • Helena Knyazeva

    (National Research University Higher School of Economics (Russia))

Abstract

The modern theory of complex systems changes our view of historical processes, accompanied by uncertainties, instabilities and ambiguities. The knowledge of this theory allows us to master a system or holistic thinking, and to understand the laws of functioning and growth of not just structural, but dynamic complexity. Uncertainties and chaotic elements that indicate any state of crisis are not only negative factors that we should beware of and not without fear to worry about them. We can learn to manage them and use them in the way of renewal of social systems, producing innovations. The strategic vision of complex systems evolution becomes an effective tool for decision making and scenarios planning based on our participatory activities with alternative futures. The article examines the case of Shell Corporation, which has been using scenario thinking technologies since the early 1970s, which has given it incredible competitive advantages and incentives for rapid growth and transformation into an international energy giant.

Suggested Citation

  • Helena Knyazeva, 2020. "Strategies of Dynamic Complexity Management," Foresight and STI Governance (Foresight-Russia till No. 3/2015), National Research University Higher School of Economics, vol. 14(4), pages 34-45.
    • Handle: RePEc:hig:fsight:v:14:y:2020:i:4:p:34-45
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://foresight-journal.hse.ru/data/2021/01/17/1344204956/3-Knyazeva-34-45.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Charles B. Keating & Polinpapilinho F. Katina, 2019. "Complex system governance: Concept, utility, and challenges," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(5), pages 687-705, September.
    2. Wilkinson, Angela & Kupers, Roland & Mangalagiu, Diana, 2013. "How plausibility-based scenario practices are grappling with complexity to appreciate and address 21st century challenges," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(4), pages 699-710.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dmitry Katalevsky, 2023. "New Governance Approaches to Prevent the Collapse of Complex Socioeconomic Systems," Foresight and STI Governance (Foresight-Russia till No. 3/2015), National Research University Higher School of Economics, vol. 17(3), pages 56-67.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Minkkinen, Matti, 2019. "The anatomy of plausible futures in policy processes: Comparing the cases of data protection and comprehensive security," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 172-180.
    2. Derbyshire, James, 2017. "Potential surprise theory as a theoretical foundation for scenario planning," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 77-87.
    3. James Derbyshire & Mandeep Dhami & Ian Belton & Dilek Önkal, 2023. "The value of experiments in futures and foresight science as illustrated by the case of scenario planning," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(2), June.
    4. Tyfield, David & Zuev, Dennis, 2018. "Stasis, dynamism and emergence of the e-mobility system in China: A power relational perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 259-270.
    5. Sarkki, Simo & Pihlajamäki, Mia, 2019. "Baltic herring for food: Shades of grey in how backcasting recommendations work across exploratory scenarios," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 200-209.
    6. Ram, Camelia, 2020. "Scenario presentation and scenario generation in multi-criteria assessments: An exploratory study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    7. Ramirez, Rafael & Wilkinson, Angela, 2014. "Rethinking the 2×2 scenario method: Grid or frames?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 254-264.
    8. Fortes, Patrícia & Alvarenga, António & Seixas, Júlia & Rodrigues, Sofia, 2015. "Long-term energy scenarios: Bridging the gap between socio-economic storylines and energy modeling," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 161-178.
    9. Ilkka Tuomi, 2019. "Chronotopes of foresight: Models of time‐space in probabilistic, possibilistic and constructivist futures," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(2), June.
    10. Ramboarison-Lalao, Lovanirina & Gannouni, Kais, 2019. "Liberated firm, a leverage of well-being and technological change? A prospective study based on the scenario method," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 129-139.
    11. James Derbyshire, 2019. "Use of scenario planning as a theory‐driven evaluation tool," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(1), March.
    12. Pouru-Mikkola, Laura & Minkkinen, Matti & Malho, Maria & Neuvonen, Aleksi, 2023. "Exploring knowledge creation, capabilities, and relations in a distributed policy foresight system: Case Finland," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 186(PB).
    13. James Derbyshire, 2020. "History and scenario planning: A commentary on Schoemaker 2020," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(3-4), September.
    14. Ariane Voglhuber-Slavinsky & Hartmut Derler & Björn Moller & Ewa Dönitz & Enno Bahrs & Simon Berner, 2021. "Measures to Increase Local Food Supply in the Context of European Framework Scenarios for the Agri-Food Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-22, September.
    15. Heinonen, Sirkka & Minkkinen, Matti & Karjalainen, Joni & Inayatullah, Sohail, 2017. "Testing transformative energy scenarios through causal layered analysis gaming," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 101-113.
    16. de Bruin, Jilske Olda & Kok, Kasper & Hoogstra-Klein, Marjanke Alberttine, 2017. "Exploring the potential of combining participative backcasting and exploratory scenarios for robust strategies: Insights from the Dutch forest sector," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(P2), pages 269-282.
    17. Bourgeois, Robin & Penunia, Esther & Bisht, Sonali & Boruk, Don, 2017. "Foresight for all: Co-elaborative scenario building and empowerment," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 178-188.
    18. Susara E. Merwe & Reinette Biggs & Rika Preiser, 2020. "Sensemaking as an approach for resilience assessment in an Essential Service Organization," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 84-106, March.
    19. Wayland, Rebecca, 2019. "Three senses of paradigm in scenario methodology: A preliminary framework and systematic approach for using intuitive logics scenarios to change mental models and improve strategic decision-making in ," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 504-516.
    20. Burt, George & Nair, Anup Karath, 2020. "Rigidities of imagination in scenario planning: Strategic foresight through ‘Unlearning’," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    foresight; non-linearity; uncertainty; participatory futures; synergy; complex system; holism; emergence; scenario planning; alternative futures;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hig:fsight:v:14:y:2020:i:4:p:34-45. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Nataliya Gavrilicheva or Mikhail Salazkin (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/hsecoru.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.