Towards an Understanding of System Wide Change

HOW DOES CHANGE COME ABOUT ? / ABOUT SOCIETAL INTERACTIVE CHANGE An inter/trans-disciplinary attempt to the complexity of a contemporary change prospect SPIRITUALITY-BIODIVERSITY / CREATIVE PARTNERSHIP OF WELFARE – a Past, Present, and Future Outlook eliciting the Heritage, Contemporary Challenge, Near and Next Perspective. Does Humankind matter beyond limitations and paradoxes? Are “Contemporary World Changes” possible, and how to be proceeded? Are all these probabilistic and/or fuzzy patterns, or else? How could be done the initial steps toward ’Innovative Social Relations’ for “Sustainable Development“ through Social Signal Processing – within a cybernetic and systemic background addressing an incompleteness / inconsistence (Gödel, 1931) of our human elicited and disseminated information/knowledge/data? [versus the only “N-1” characteristics from a set of “N” rational desired characteristics cognitively described into the current systemic context] Purpose – This (e-)book aims to constitute an initial and open global study addressing the open stance “Past, Present, Future” as a challenge to analyse the possibility and to elicit a part of the procedures related to “Contemporary World Changes”, and to propose the initial steps toward an ‘Innovative Social Relations’ for “Sustainable Development” corpus through Social Signal Processing. It is to gain the conceptual basis toward the elicitation of the constructs: new type of entrepreneur, and a new type of entrepreneur of PEACE – the both types within Knowledge Society  Mind/Conscience/Consciousness Society. Design/methodology/approach – The nucleus of this critical global study is addressed to the contemporary and near future (e-)World – Including an Interacting Forum of (e-)readers from an open societal systemic background. The nucleus is step by step extended to eleven inquiries, their explanation, the associated guide by the content of the table presenting four cases of the relation between different modelling approaches according to an extended System Theory to a (Non)Systemic Theory – on the background of KNOWLEDGE vs. FRAME concepts, subsequent to an ordered list of I – XXIV inquiries, and their details – addressing a so called Social Signal Processing toward the constituting and developing of an ‘Innovative Social Relations’ for “Sustainable Development” corpus. All these would be the locus for (re)acting the proposed 'SPIRITUALITY-BIODIVERSITY / CREATIVE PARTNERSHIP OF WELFARE' composed construct as an innovative perspective for the open stance “Past, Present, Future”. Findings – 'SPIRITUALITY-BIODIVERSITY / CREATIVE PARTNERSHIP OF WELFARE' composed construct as a perspective for the open stance “Past, Present, Future”. So, our Humankind beyond the space-time continuum could transit from the contemporary Knowledge Economy/Society by eliciting Contemporary World Changes, within a multi-staged approach toward a Mind/Conscience/Consciousness Economy/Society. A primal role would be assigned by the coherent, cohesive and concordant implementation of the triadic construct Generosity versus Creativity and Solidarity, and the elicited way to attain the scientific and supposed praxis realm toward an ‘Innovative Social Relations’ for “Sustainable Development” corpus through Social Signal Processing / toward a new type of entrepreneur, and toward a new type of entrepreneur of PEACE – the both types within Knowledge Society  Mind/Conscience/Consciousness Society. Originality/value – It is obvious that a critical analysis and synthesis of our worldwide (post-)crisis events must deal with an original approach within an added gnoseologic and/or epistemic value, and expected responsible 'points' - as societal turning points - yesterday, today, tomorrow....

2014

Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute

We outline primary features of a theoretical perspective on processes of social change in human systems that deals with broadly defined kinds of process, the nature of variants that are expressed and consolidate as change occurs, and, with specific reference to agency, the ways in which intentional actors are implicated in the changes that befall them. Our aim is to contribute to a general theory of process that is not prejudiced by the possible misrepresentation of outcomes arising in particular contexts (e.g. modernity), or the contexts themselves, as being causal processes. We direct attention to four problems of a methodological and ethical nature that may arise when analysts strive for generality.

The paper seeks to explore critically specific issues relating to IS, process and organizational change. The authors suggest that IS development should be regarded as a particular case of organisational change – an emergent consequence of individual and organisational learning processes. Empowerment of individuals to express their values, goals and preferences within the political and social context of the business organization is suggested to be at the heart of the development process, and crucial to strategic thinking. The authors conclude that a systemic Hermeneutic Dialectic perspective is essential in helping analysts to recognize (and engage) the inherent ambiguities and uncertainties of socially constructed realities. Vehicles are needed to enable individuals to express and to reflect upon their views. A framework is then proposed which the authors believe to be such a vehicle.

Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 2015

In this paper we put forward a theory of large systems change (LSC), where large systems are defined as having breadth (i.e. engaging large numbers of people, institutions, and geographies) and depth (i.e. changing the complex relationships among elements of power and structural relationships simultaneously). We focus primarily on transformational LSC, recognising that such systems are complex adaptive systems in which change is continuous and emergent, but directions can be supported. A typology of change actions with two core dimensions-'confrontation' and 'collaboration' on the horizontal axis and 'generative' and 'ungenerative' change on the vertical-suggests that change strategies can be classified into four broad archetypes: forcing change, supporting change, paternalistic change, or co-creating change. LSC theory development focuses on three core questions: what is the foundation of LSC concepts and methods, what needs to change, and how does LSC occur? We conclude by reviewing how papers in the Special Issue fit into these questions.

Globalizations, 2014

This article offers a discussion of dialectics from a complexity perspective. Dialectics is a term much utilized but infrequently defined. This article suggests that a spectrum of ideas exist concerning understandings of dialectics. We are particularly critical of Hegelian dialectics which we see as anthropocentric and teleological. While Marxist approaches to dialectics, in the form of historical materialism, marked a break from the idealist elements of Hegelian dialectics they retained traces of this approach. The article offers a partial discussion of essential elements of dialectics, which we consider to be the analysis of change, the centrality of contradiction and the methodology of abstraction. Points of overlap with complexity thinking are highlighted together with those points where complexity thinking and dialectical approaches diverge. We conclude with some suggestions of how complexity thinking might contribute to a development of dialectical approaches.

Management Accounting Research, 2001

Despite widespread research on why and how organizations change, what constitutes change is often taken for granted. Its definition is avoided. Studies based on individuals' rational choice imply that change flows from purposive actions in accordance with an objective, external reality whereas contextualism argues that change results from institutional pressures, isomorphisms and routines. But both depict change as the passage of an entity, whether an organization or accounting practices, from one identifiable and unique status to another. Despite their differences over whether reality is independent, concrete and external, or socially constructed, both assume that actors (or researchers) can identify a reality to trace the scale and direction of changes. This reflects modernist beliefs that organizational space and time are unique and linear. The paper takes issue with this and argues that 'a-centred organizations' and 'drift' should replace conventional definitions of organizations and change. The arguments are inspired by the arguments of the sociology of translation and constructivism, and insights from two case studies of Enterprise Resource Planning system implementations in large multinational organizations. The latter illustrate how defining change is problematic-as new systems gave rise to multiple spaces and times within the organizations. The paper traces the implications of this for control and accounting studies tout court.

2001

Despite widespread research on why and how organisations change, what constitutes change is often taken for granted. Its definition is avoided. Studies based on individuals’ rational choice imply that change flows from purposive actions in accordance with an objective, external reality whereas contextualism argues that change results from institutional pressures, isomorphisms, and routines. But both depict change as the passage of an entity, whether an organisation or accounting practices, from one identifiable and unique status to another. Despite their differences over whether reality is independent, concrete and external, or socially constructed, both assume that actors (or researchers) can identify a reality to trace the scale and direction of changes. This reflects modernist beliefs that organisational space and time are unique and linear. The paper takes issue with this and argues that ‘a-centred organisations’ and ‘drift’ should replace conventional definitions of organisations and change. The arguments are inspired by the arguments of the sociology of translation and constructivism, and insights from two case studies of Enterprise Resource Planning system implementations in large multinational organisations. The latter illustrate how defining change is problematic - as new systems gave rise to multiple spaces and times within the organisations. The paper traces the implications of this for control and accounting studies tout court.

Annals of Contemporary Developments in Management & HR, 2020

The current paper has attempted to shed light on the concept of change and the prominent models that can be of value for managerial authorities to bring transformation in their business. the paper sheds light on change which is refers to the continuous modifications that an organisation or individuals make to deal with adjustments in any matter. The paper highlights that although there are no static models of change yet still, some prominent perspectives and frameworks can be considered for top management and decision making bodies to make sense of the concept of change and work on developing policies and practices to ensure they remain competitive. The article discusses the idea forwarded by Lewin for change which catered to three stages at the first place. Following to this, the article discusses Burke and Litwin model of change that has been widely considered for business sectors for change management. Towards the end, the article discusses the ADKAR model of change. Taken togeth...