A Board's Journey into Complexity Science: Lessons from (and for) Staff and Board Members

Complexity science has been used as a lens to interpret organizations (Goldstein 1994; Morgan 1993, 1997; Stacey 1992, 1996a; Wheatley 1992; Wheatley and Kellner-Rogers 1996; Zimmerman 1993a, 1993b). These interpretations have shone a light on aspects of organizations that were idiosyncratic or at least difficult to reconcile with dominant organizational theories. In this paper, we go beyond interpreting results through a complexity lens to demonstrating how board members and staff of an organization deliberately applied insights from complexity science to improve their work. Using an action learning approach, we worked with the board and staff for a year. One of the lessons from this journey was the need to differentiate between "fake" complexity and real complexity. Using "fake" complexity, simple issues were complexified and complex issues were avoided. Another key lesson was the role of relationships for complex issues. This paper presents a "STAR" relationship model to help organizations discern the generative potential of current and future relationships. Each point, or letter, of the STAR represents one dimension of a potentially generative relationship. Through the action research process, both the researchers and the members of the organization extended our understanding of how complexity science can enhance the capacity to evolve in a rapidly changing environment.