IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/jfr/jbar11/v9y2020i1p44-51.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Chaos, Complexity, and Contingency Theories: A Comparative Analysis and Application to the 21st Century Organization

Author

Listed:
  • Franklin M. Lartey

Abstract

Organizations in the 21st century deal with constant changes such as globalization, technological evolutions, regulatory changes, competition, and other unexpected events, among others. These challenges can be viewed and addressed through the lenses of contemporary theories. This paper selected three contemporary theories namely chaos, complexity, and contingency theories, and presented their foundations and characteristics by comparing and contrasting their key concepts. These concepts include nonlinearity, feedback, bifurcation, strange attractors, fractals, and self-organization for chaos theory; nonlinearity, dynamism, feedback, self-organization, emergence, and adaptability for complexity theory; and adaptation, equifinality, effectiveness, and congruency for contingency theory. Examples of studies and organizational applications of these theories were provided, and implications for scholars and organizational leaders were discussed. By explaining notions such as how the capacity of a system could be greater than the sum of the capacities of its subunits, this paper can act as a starting point for anyone seeking to understand the three theories or use them for research or organizational purpose.

Suggested Citation

  • Franklin M. Lartey, 2020. "Chaos, Complexity, and Contingency Theories: A Comparative Analysis and Application to the 21st Century Organization," Journal of Business Administration Research, Journal of Business Administration Research, Sciedu Press, vol. 9(1), pages 44-51, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:jfr:jbar11:v:9:y:2020:i:1:p:44-51
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciedupress.com/journal/index.php/jbar/article/download/18224/11183
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://www.sciedupress.com/journal/index.php/jbar/article/view/18224
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Levy, 1994. "Chaos theory and strategy: Theory, application, and managerial implications," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(S2), pages 167-178, June.
    2. R. A. Thiétart & B. Forgues, 1995. "Chaos Theory and Organization," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 19-31, February.
    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. Moses Waiganjo & Danijela Godinic & Bojan Obrenovic, 2021. "Strategic Planning and Sustainable Innovation During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Literature Review," International Journal of Innovation and Economic Development, Inovatus Services Ltd., vol. 7(5), pages 52-59, December.
    2. Beatrice Karitu & Wanja Wangondu & Stephen Muathe, 2022. "A theoretical route towards conceptualization of start-ups in emerging markets: A Kenyan perspective," International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147-4478), Center for the Strategic Studies in Business and Finance, vol. 11(4), pages 448-457, June.

    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. Arianna Dal Forno & Ugo Merlone, 2021. "Envy effects on conflict dynamics in supervised work groups," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 44(2), pages 755-779, December.
    2. Godfrey Cadogan, 2014. "Chaos in a Large System of Decision‐Makers with Heterogeneous Beliefs with Application to Index Option Prices," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 487-501, July.
    3. Bill McKelvey, 1999. "Avoiding Complexity Catastrophe in Coevolutionary Pockets: Strategies for Rugged Landscapes," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(3), pages 294-321, June.
    4. Agnieszka Dziubinska, 2018. "Understanding Complexity Leadership: Lesson From Emerging Environment (Przywodztwo w warunkach zlozonosci – doswiadczenia z dzialalnosci w warunkach rynkow wylaniajacych sie)," Research Reports, University of Warsaw, Faculty of Management, vol. 1(26), pages 155-172.
    5. Tammy E. Beck & Donde Ashmos Plowman, 2009. "Experiencing Rare and Unusual Events Richly: The Role of Middle Managers in Animating and Guiding Organizational Interpretation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(5), pages 909-924, October.
    6. Sergey Samoilenko, 2008. "Information systems fitness and risk in IS development: Insights and implications from chaos and complex systems theories," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 281-292, July.
    7. Verena Komander & Andreas König, 2024. "Organizations on stage: organizational research and the performing arts," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 74(1), pages 303-352, February.
    8. Kevin J. Dooley & Andrew H. Van de Ven, 1999. "Explaining Complex Organizational Dynamics," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(3), pages 358-372, June.
    9. Zhao, LiuWei & Chang, Jianwei & DU, Jianguo, 2019. "Dynamics analysis on competition between manufacturing and remanufacturing in context of government subsidies," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 119-128.
    10. Henkel, Joachim & Rønde, Thomas & Wagner, Marcus, 2015. "And the winner is—Acquired. Entrepreneurship as a contest yielding radical innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 295-310.
    11. Laure Cabantous & Jean-Pascal Gond, 2011. "Rational Decision Making as Performative Praxis: Explaining Rationality's Éternel Retour," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(3), pages 573-586, June.
    12. Bischi, Gian Italo & Gardini, Laura & Kopel, Michael, 2000. "Analysis of global bifurcations in a market share attraction model," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 24(5-7), pages 855-879, June.
    13. Gaim, Medhanie & Wåhlin, Nils, 2016. "In search of a creative space: A conceptual framework of synthesizing paradoxical tensions," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 33-44.
    14. Mingers, John & White, Leroy, 2010. "A review of the recent contribution of systems thinking to operational research and management science," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(3), pages 1147-1161, December.
    15. Marie-Laure Djelic & Sigrid Quack, 2008. "Institutions and transnationalization," Sciences Po publications info:hdl:2441/2ilfdosc5a9, Sciences Po.
    16. Moncaleano, Carlos Javier Martínez, 2018. "Teoría del Caos y Estrategia Empresarial," Revista Tendencias, Universidad de Narino, vol. 19(1), pages 204-214, January.
    17. Philip Anderson, 1999. "Perspective: Complexity Theory and Organization Science," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(3), pages 216-232, June.
    18. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/2ilfdosc5a9umpcja7bbsturuq is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Whitby, Simon & Parker, David & Tobias, Andrew, 2001. "Non-linear dynamics and duopolistic competition: a R&D model and simulation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 51(3), pages 179-191, March.
    20. Alain Desreumaux, 2008. "Refaire de la stratégie?," Revue Finance Contrôle Stratégie, revues.org, vol. 11(Special), pages 67-107, June.
    21. Marcus Wagner, 2007. "Determinants of the Acquisition of Smaller Firms by Larger Incumbents in High-Tech Industries: Are they related to Innovation and Technology Sourcing?," SFB 649 Discussion Papers SFB649DP2007-063, Sonderforschungsbereich 649, Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    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:jfr:jbar11:v:9:y:2020:i:1:p:44-51. 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: Grace Lee (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://jbar.sciedupress.com .

    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.