Chapter 10: Relativistic Complexity and the Intelligence Governance Theory/Strategy

The first section of this chapter is an introduction to relativistic complexity (a significant component of the intelligent organization theory). The presence of intense intelligence/consciousness-centricity and 3^rd order stability-centricity in the human world renders complexity relativistic. The impact of the human mental space is so tremendous that complexity is in the mind of the beholder, and predictability becomes highly subjective. In this situation, the state of relativistic static equilibrium may be beneficial. Certain spaces of complexity appear as spaces of relativistic order with surface patterns becoming more apparent. Such spaces must be creatively explored and exploited (higher exploratory capacity) leading to a more advanced level of intelligence advantage. In this respect, effective self-transcending constructions, high self-organizing capacity and emergence-intelligence capacity are significant attributes that the new leadership and governance system in intelligent human organizations must exploit. Holistically, the two strategies focus on concurrent exploitation of intelligence/consciousness-centricity and relative complexity, and optimizing the more comprehensive contributions of the integrated deliberate and emergent strategy.

Many issues/problems that present human organizations (nations, political systems, communities, business organizations, markets) are encountering due to accelerating changes (mindset, thinking, values, perceptions, expectations, redefined boundaries and high interactive dynamics) that cannot be well-managed with traditional knowledge and hierarchical practices are affecting governance and governance systems. Fundamentally, governance deals with power, interest, and conflict. The traditional governance systems are hierarchical, highly directed, controlled and managed, and the relational aspect has not been allocated sufficient priority resulting in extensive disparities. In the current complex dynamical and high interdependency environment, its weaknesses and constraints are highly apparent. The latter includes ‘space-time compression’; incoherency in thinking, values, perceptions, and expectations between the leadership and the other agents; diversification in stakeholders’ needs not accommodated; and constraints of current governance theories. Thus, a new theory that provides a more ‘realistic’ foundation is essential for deeper contemplation.

Primarily, recognizing the inherent strengths of human agents and the fundamental constraints/weaknesses of human organizations is a key foundation towards better adaptation, leadership, governance, resilience and sustainability. In all human organizations, the agents are intrinsic intense intelligence/consciousness sources that could easily transform their behavioral schemata. This observation contradicts the Newtonian/design paradigm, as the organizational dynamic of human agents is complex, nonlinear, constantly/continuously changing with limited predictability. In addition, human agents are self-centric, self-powered, stability-centric, independent and interdependent, network-centric and self-organizing due to high awareness. In this situation, high self-organizing capacity and emergence-intelligence capacity are new niches. However, this phenomenon can create new opportunities, innovation, and elevates competiveness; or destruction.

In particular, effective leadership and governance are spontaneously emerging key requirements in all human groupings — a primary trait for human collective survival. Historically, many organizations disintegrated because of the weaknesses in leadership and governance. Currently, with more knowledge-intensive and higher participative new agents (self-powered intrinsic leadership) possessing modified attributes that are dissimilar from the older generations (also due to the deeper integration of the economic, social, political, and environmental perspective), reduces consensus and collaboration, and renders governance and leadership even more nonlinear or dysfunctional. In particular, the traditional governance systems of more organizations are manifesting their constraints and incompetency, including incoherency due to new values and cultural pressure, and the wider spread of self-organizing networks. The emergent of informal networks is a more commonly observed phenomenon worldwide. Apparently, a deeper comprehension on the diminishing effect of the traditional organizational thinking (political, social, economic), governance capacity, precise strategic planning, decision making, hierarchical structure, communications and engagement, empowerment leadership, management, operations, and the highly nonlinear relational parameter is essential. Apparently, new principles of governance must emerge (intelligent human organization > thinking system + feeling system).

The new paradigmatic path of the intelligence governance strategy that exploits intelligence/consciousness-centricity, complexity-centricity, and network-centricity concurrently, introduces a new basic strategic path towards better adaptive governance and acceptance governance. The latter focuses on integrating self-powered self-organizing governance, reducing direct governance, and increasing e-governance and network-centric governance as a new necessity. In this case, the merits of adopting the intelligence leadership strategic approach simultaneously are more apparent. Hence, the new governance focal points must include more and better interconnected actors, the critical ability of self-organizing communications (supported by mobile/social media development), immersion of leadership nodes in networks (better exploitation of e-governance), increasing coherency of complex networks (exploiting interdependency of network of networks, and better network management), and elevating self-transcending constructions capability (higher self-organizing governance capacity and emergence-intelligence capacity) that better facilitates emergence through multi-level and ‘multi-lateral’ dynamics (complex adaptive networks <=> intelligent networks). Thus, the intelligence governance strategy emphasizes that mass lateral collectivity (acceptance governance) rather than selective enforced hierarchical empowerment as the more constructive approach in the present contact. In particular, the stabilityinducing role of leaders and institutions are critical. Apparently, optimizing the ‘everybody is in charge’ phenomenon (whenever necessary) is a more viable option.