Narrow Results

This chapter is an introduction to complexity theory (encompassing chaos — a subset of complexity), a nascent domain, although, it possesses a historical root. Some fundamental properties of chaos/complexity (including complexity mindset, nonlinearity, interconnectedness, interdependency, far-from-equilibrium, butterfly effect, determinism/in-determinism, unpredictability, bifurcation, deterministic chaotic dynamic, complex dynamic, complex adaptive dynamic, dissipation, basin of attraction, attractor, chaotic attractor, strange attractor, phase space, rugged landscape, red queen race, holism, self-organization, self-transcending constructions, scale invariance, historical dependency, constructionist hypothesis and emergence), and its development are briefly examined. In particular, the similarities (sensitive dependence on initial conditions, unpredictability) and differences between deterministic chaotic systems (DCS) and complex adaptive systems (CAS) are analyzed. The edge of emergence (2^nd critical value, a new concept) is also conceived to provide a more comprehensive explanation of the complex adaptive dynamic (CAD) and emergence. Subsequently, a simplified system spectrum is introduced to illustrate the attributes, and summarize the relationships of the various categories of common systems.

Next, the recognition that human organizations are nonlinear living systems (high finite dimensionality CAS) with adaptive and thinking agents is examined. This new comprehension indicates that a re-calibration in thinking is essential. In the human world, high levels of human intelligence/consciousness (the latent impetus that is fundamentally stability-centric) drives a redefined human adaptive and evolution dynamic encompassing better potentials of self-organization or self-transcending constructions, autocatalysis, circular causation, localized spaces/networks, hysteresis, futuristic, and emergent of new order (involving a multi-layer structure and dynamic) — vividly indicating that intelligence/consciousness-centric is extremely vital. Simultaneously, complexity associated properties/characteristics in human organizations must be better scrutinized and exploited — that is, establishing appropriate complexity-intelligence linkages is a significant necessity. In this respect, nurturing of the intelligence mindset and developing the associated paradigmatic shift is inevitable.

A distinct attempt (the basic strategic approach) of the new intelligence mindset is to organize around human intrinsic intelligence — intense intelligence-intelligence linkages that exploits human intelligence/consciousness sources individually and collectively by focusing on intelligence/consciousness-centricity, complexity-centricity, network-centricity, complexity-intelligence linkages, collective intelligence, org-consciousness, complex networks, spaces of complexity (better risk management <=> new opportunities <=> higher sustainability) and prepares for punctuation points (better crisis management <=> collectively more intelligent <=> higher resilience/sustainability) concurrently — illustrating the significance of self-organizing capability and emergence-intelligence capacity. The conceptual development introduced will serve as the basic foundation of the intelligent organization (IO) theory.

The inherent micro-structure (agent-agent/system) of human organizations has been introduced in Chapters 2 and 3. Fundamentally, human organizations are composite complex adaptive systems with human beings as interacting agents (each an intrinsic complex adaptive system). This chapter further analyzes the basic conceptual foundation of the multi-layer structure, including advantages of the intelligent biotic macro-structure (with inherent features similar to that of an intelligent biological being — a structural reform), and its unique and more integrative complex adaptive dynamic in intelligent human organizations (towards iCAD). The necessity of nurturing an intelligent biotic macro-structure with vital characteristics that better synchronize and enhance sophisticated information/knowledge-related activities is highly beneficial — achieving a higher structural capacity. Thus, the attributes, functions and higher structural capacity of the more intelligent biotic macro-structure can reinforced the competitiveness of any categories of human organizations extensively.

In this respect, connecting and engaging of intelligence/consciousness sources (individual and collective), organizing around intelligence, intelligence/ consciousness management, and the intelligent biotic macrostructure are mutually enhancing (towards higher coherency). Apparently, being intelligence/consciousness-centric is a beneficial and critical activator (strategic foundation) of the intelligence paradigmatic shift. In the present context, the roles and integration of intelligence, information and knowledge, as well as nurturing a ‘common’ language and elevating coherency in human organizations (with respect to the macro-structure and micro-structure, as well as their higher collectiveness — collectiveness capacity) must be more deeply scrutinized and utilized. The presence and significance of the individual intelligence enhancer encompassing three entities namely, intelligence, knowledge, and theory in the human thinking systems, and the necessity of nurturing a similar and effective intelligence enhancer at organizational level are analyzed. Subsequently, the supporting roles and contributions of artificial intelligence systems are also examined.

In between the macro-structure and micro-structure are two meso-structures. In the intelligent organization theory, the complexity meso-structure encompasses spaces of complexity and punctuation points. In this respect, complexity is a highly significant focal point, and the exploitation of co-existence of order and complexity is a new necessity (complexity-centricity). Next, the network meso-structure encompassing complex network (network of networks) is also an inherent structure and dynamic in all human organizations. This meso-structure is briefly introduced, and will be more deeply analyzed with respect to governance (network-centricity, network governance).

Hence, it is crucial to lead and manage human organizations with a strategic approach that integrates the above multi-layer structure/ dynamic at all time so that a higher structural capacity, collectiveness capacity, adaptive capacity, self-organizing capacity, and emergence-intelligence capacity can be nurtured. In the current highly competitive context, possessing these positive capabilities to elevate coherency and synergetic characteristics (including social consensus and the construal aspect) and dynamic is also highly crucial — a key focus of the complexity-intelligence strategy (towards achieving higher organizational mental cohesion). Hence, the significance and impact of nurturing intelligent human organizations with the complexity-intelligence-centric and network-centric approach that leads to the emergent of smarter evolvers and emergent strategists must be better understood and adopted. (The conceptual foundation on structural-dynamic coherency and synergy in intelligent human organizations developed in this chapter will be more deeply reviewed and exploited in later chapters.)

In this chapter, basic life-intelligence, and the evolution and co-evolution dynamics of eco-systems are further examined and compared to certain processes in human organizations. A special reference on human thinking systems as intelligence/consciousness sources, information decoders, information processors and complex adaptive systems (CAS) is re-emphasized. In addition, the significance of connectivity, communications, engagement, and orgmindfulness is analyzed with respect to the Abilene paradox, defensive routines and dialogue, as well as the human agent-agent/system micro-structure and micro-dynamic. The individual local self-centric (local self-enrichment processes) and the global orgcentric (global forces) evolutionary dynamics of intelligent human organizations (no global optimality) and their interacting agents (no optimal rationality) are investigated more explicitly with the exploitation of the certain complexity properties. It is observed that local order (stability of agents and networks/subsystem) is highly critical in human dynamic. It is beneficial to recognize that the intelligent complex adaptive dynamic (iCAD) driving an intelligent human organization (iCAS) is not similar to complex adaptive dynamic (CAD) in totality. This recognition provides a significant foundation and better understanding of the intelligent human organizational micro-structure and dynamic.

Essentially, there is a vital need for the transformed mindset, thinking, values, and expectations of human agents (leaders, actors, and non-actors) to be better synchronized. The intelligent person model (an ideal set of attributes) is introduced to substantiate the criticality of new vital characteristics of the human interacting agents in intelligent human organizations. Primarily, intelligent persons (a new category of agents, in particular, intelligence leaders and synergists) are concurrently intelligence/consciousness-centric, complexity-centric and network-centric. The new set of attributes includes high self-powered, intrinsic leadership, information decoding, smarter evolver, emergent strategist, and futurist capabilities. For instance, such a person is in a better position to function as a smarter evolver and emergent strategist that helps to bind a group (network, community, corporation, nation) of human thinking systems more optimally by elevating the quality of collective intelligence in the organization through better mindfulness, orgmindfulness, symbiosis, self-transcending constructions, co-evolution; deeper recognition of the characteristics of the rugged landscape and red queen race; innovative exploitation of relativistic complexity, and possessing futuristic thinking. Apparently, the presence of intelligent persons/agents will lead to a redefinition in leadership and governance strategy.

The basic foundation of intelligent complex adaptive dynamic (iCAD) exploits the interdependency of five significant attributes of intelligent human organizations (iCAS) that possess certain unique characteristics only associated with human organizations. The attributes involved are collective intelligence, connectivity, culture (mindful), organizational learning, and knowledge management, and their integrative structure and dynamics. This foundation pillar of the iCAD is conceived as the 3C-OK framework. Recognizing the necessity of this integrated and redefined foundation of the intelligent human complex adaptive dynamic is vital, as this set of attributes is not present (minimal) in other complex adaptive systems (CAS). In this respect there are differences between highly intelligent human adaptive dynamic (iCAD) and other biological complex adaptive dynamics (CAD). A primary factor that created the difference is the mental function of orgmindfulness. Thus, the characteristics and capabilities of human collective intelligence are substantially different from swarm intelligence. In this respect, the high intelligenceintelligence linkages which are strongly correlated with collective intelligence [determined by the characteristics of the agents’ abstract mental space (including a space for deeper contemplation)], and org-consciousness and the relational parameter (relational capacity) are new significant focal points (an intelligent human organization <=> at least a thinking system + feeling system).

In the intelligent organization theory, the integrated 3C-OK structure and dynamic is mutually enhancing with organizing around intelligence and the intelligent biotic macro-structure. The framework supports the elevation of the collectiveness capacity and adaptive capacity which are key capacities of intelligent human organizations. In particular, their interdependency illustrates that organizational learning and knowledge management (a vital capability associated with the creation of an intangible abstract mental space in the human world) cannot be executed effectively in any human organizations without the presence of the other three attributes. Hence, human interacting agents, each an intense intelligence/consciousness source, and embedded with a set of changing nonlinear behavioral schemata, and their linkages (including the social cognition and construal perspective that influence the self-transcending constructions capability, and emergence-intelligence capacity of the organization) must be well-exploited. In this respect, the integrated 3C-OK structure provides the basic strata of the iCAD. Thus, an organization that places sufficient emphasis on the integrated 3C-OK structure and dynamic will gradually experience the emergence of a higher level human iCAD. The presence of such an environment also facilitates faster and better responses to unexpected changes.

Fundamentally, effective leadership is associated with its ability to achieve collective goals (agents and their organization, stability-inducing capability) and organizational sustainability, irrespective of the nature of the organizations (leadership capacity <=> relational capacity <=> unifying capacity). The mismatch of the bureaucratic mindset and its associated hierarchical/administrative leadership with the changing situation is escalating. Basically, the presence of an adaptive leadership is beneficial. In this respect, the collectiveness capacity and relational capacity of the organization are critical attributes. It has been recognized that the intense and quality of these two capacities is highly dependent on both the thinking and attributes of the leaders, as well as the other interacting agents (including non-actors, and quality of leader–agents exchanges). Overall, a high leadership capacity and organizational mental cohesion is a key necessity. In general, the success of today’s global turbulence can only be achieved through global mental cohesion.

In order to achieve this, fresh insights beginning with constructive intelligence-intelligence linkages is required. In the present state, it is significant to note that for any categories of human organizations (economic, social, education, political, and military) their agents (employees, citizens, members, stakeholders) are possessing redefined attributes (principles, values and expectations), due to better education, quick access to information, and high interconnectivity. This profound transition (supported by intensive usage of mobile/social media technology) transformed some other attributes including autonomy/ independency, autopoiesis, self-centricity, self-organizing communications, interdependency, symbiosis, and other self-organizing capabilities. Consequently, current human beings are more sophisticated interacting agents. Hence, leading these ‘transformed’ agents is drastically different from leading traditional setups. Agent-centricity is a new vital attribute that required deeper attention, and one commonality among agents at all levels must be achieved — stability-centricity (agent-centricity <=> intelligence/consciousness-centricity + stability-centricity).

The more intelligent, complex adaptive, and nonlinear evolving dynamic is driven by the intrinsic intelligence/consciousness of the individuals, and the collective intelligence and org-consciousness of the organization (anticipatory, adaptive capacity), as well as local spaces/ complex networks — the presence of networks (formal and informal) is becoming more dominant, and this development renders elevating collectiveness capacity (consensus and collaboration) at organizational level more complex. Apparently, coupled with the influence of the knowledge-intensive, fast-changing, more complex environment, and the modified agents’ attributes, an immense shift in strategic thinking, leadership attributes, governance characteristics, management abilities and operational style in the new generation of leaders is inevitable. In general, the leader–follower gap has been narrowed, and their relationship (relational parameter) is more complex and nonlinear, again, confirming that intelligence/consciousness-centricity must be a key focus of the new leadership.

In such a situation, a deeper insight into complexity is inevitable. In this case, a better comprehension of leadership strategy and organizational dynamic can be acquired by ‘bisociating’ some properties of the complexity theory, and the different perspectives of complexity-intelligence linkages. The resulting evolutionary model to be introduced in this chapter is the intelligence leadership theory/strategy for iCAS. In this model, an intelligence leader must recognize that a fundamental capability of intelligence is stability enhancement. Concurrently, an intelligence leader must be an effective lateral/collective actor (always encompassing agent-agent, intelligence-intelligence, agent-network, agent-system, and network-system linkages; and the intrinsic leadership capacity of all agents, and collective leadership capacity of networks and the organization) with a new set of attributes (encompassing enabler, smarter evolver, and unifying, emergent strategist and synergist capabilities).

Hence, an effective intelligence leader must possess certain relevant or appropriate attributes of the traditional leadership, as well as a set of new complexity-intelligence related attributes that can better ensure the survival of the agents, integrate networks, and elevate the resilience, and sustainability of the organization (achieving higher coherency, synergy, constructionist effect, self-organizing capacity, emergence-intelligence capacity, unifying capacity and organizational mental cohesion) — (constructionist effect <=> innovation and creativity) — that is, focusing on continuous acquisition of capacities improvement is critical. In addition, with this paradigmatic shift, possessing the latent leadership capability is highly beneficial.

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.