Self-organized structures, control hierarchy and information processing
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15665/dem.v16i1.1483Keywords:
Self-organization, Organizational Structure, Information ProcessingAbstract
The hierarchical structure has been dominant in the business context because of the ease with which it exercises control and reduces the risks of the limited rationality of the individual. However, the precariousness of these structures in the processing of information has been evidenced, and by extension the difficulty to adapt to the change. These difficulties can lead organizations to business failure and chain effects that arise from it, for these reasons it is necessary to find alternative structural ways to overcome these problems. In this research, a literature review is made of the way in which the organizational structure is related to the performance of organizations from different theoretical perspectives. Subsequently, the failures of hierarchical control structures are identified, as the dominant structural form in the current economic system in terms of how they process information, learn and make decisions, and then contrast the way in which these characteristics are presented in systems self-organized natural and artificial. Because of the review of literature in natural and artificial self-organized systems, it was found that they are highly robust in the way they process information, since they manage to transform information from the environment into knowledge to make agile, fast and quality decisions. From this, it is necessary to transfer these properties of the self-organized systems to the business organizations by means of the design of structures that encourage self-organization to increase their performance and avoid the failure and chain effects that this causes. The implications of an organization of this type and the lines of research that originate from this work are also discussed.
Resumen
La estructura jerárquica ha sido dominante en el contexto empresarial por la facilidad que tiene para ejercer control y disminuir los riesgos de la racionalidad limitada del individuo. Sin embargo, se ha evidenciado la precariedad de estas estructuras en el procesamiento de información, y por extensión la dificultad para adaptarse al cambio. Estas dificultades pueden llevar a las organizaciones al fracaso empresarial y a los efectos en cadena que se desprenden de éste, por estas razones es necesario encontrar formas estructurales alternativas que superen estos problemas. En esta investigación se hace una revisión de literatura de la forma en que la estructura organizacional está relacionada con el desempeño de las organizaciones desde diferentes perspectivas teóricas. Posteriormente se identifican las fallas que presentan las estructuras jerárquicas de control, como la forma estructural dominante en el sistema económico actual en cuanto a la forma como procesan información, aprenden y toman decisiones, para luego contrastar la forma en que se presentan estas características en sistemas auto-organizados naturales y artificiales. Como resultado de la revisión de literatura en sistemas autoorganizados naturales y artificiales, se encontró que son altamente robustos en la forma como procesan información, ya que logran transformar la información del entorno en conocimiento para tomar decisiones ágiles, rápidas y de calidad. A partir de esto, es necesario trasladar estas propiedades de los sistemas autoorganizados a las organizaciones empresariales por medio del diseño de estructuras que fomenten la autoorganización para incrementar su desempeño y evitar el fracaso y los efectos en cadena que este origina. Se discuten también las implicaciones de una organización de este tipo y las líneas de investigación que se originan de este trabajo.
Resumo
A estrutura hierárquica foi desenvolvida no contexto empresarial pela facilidade que tem para controle e diminuição dos riscos da racionalidade limitada do indivíduo. Sim embargo, se há evidenciado a precariedade de estruturas no processamento de informação, e por extensão a dificuldade para adaptar-se ao câmbio. Estas dificuldades podem levar a as organizações ao mercado financeiro e aos efeitos em cadeia, se você está desesperado, por estas razões, é necessário encontrar formas estruturais alternativas que superarem esses problemas. Esta pesquisa tem uma revisão da literatura da forma em que é a estrutura organizacional está relacionada com o desempenho das organizações de diferentes perspectivas teóricas. Posteriormente se identifica as faltas que apresentam as estruturas de controle, como a forma estrutural dominante no sistema econômico real em como a forma como processamento de informações, aprender e tomar decisões, para depois contrastar a forma em que se apresentar estas características em sistemas autoorganizados naturales y artificiales. Como resultado da revisão de literatura em sistemas auto naturais e artificiais, encontrou-se que é altamente robusto na forma como a informática, que deseja transformar a informação do entorno em conhecimento para tomar decisões ágiles, rápidas e de qualidade. A partir disto, é necessário transferir estas propriedades dos sistemas autoorganizados às organizações empresariais por meio de projeto de estruturas que fomentam a auto-organização para incrementar o desempenho e evitar o fracasso e os efeitos em cadeia que este origina. Se discutem também as implicações de uma organização deste tipo e as linhas de pesquisa que se originam deste trabalho.
References
Adler, Paul S. (2001) Market, hierarchy and trust: The knowledge economy and the future of capitalism. Organization Science, (12)(2), 215-234.
Anderson, P. (1999) Complexity Theory and Organization Science. Organizational Science, (10)(3), 216–232.
Barnard, C. I. (1938) Functions of the Executive. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA.
Baum J. R. & Wally S. (2003) Strategic decision speed and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal (24)(11), 1107–1129.
Benassi, M. (2009) Investigating modular organizations. Journal of Management and Governance, (13)(3), 163-192. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-008-9078-1
Barabási, A. L. (2002) Linked: the new science of networks. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Pub.
Bohórquez, L. E. & Espinosa, A. (2015) Theoretical approaches to managing complexity in organizations: A comparative analysis. Estudios Gerenciales, (31)(134), 20–29.
Bohórquez, Luz, E. (2016) La comprensión de las organizaciones empresariales y su ambiente como sistemas de complejidad creciente: rasgos e implicaciones. Revista Ingeniería Universidad Distrital Francisco José de Caldas, (21)(3), 363- 377. http://dx.doi.org/10.14483/udistrital.jour.reving.2016.3.a07
Gualdrón, L.; Acosta, J. &. Bohórquez, L. (2017) Estructuras Organizacionales y Adaptación a las Condiciones Cambiantes del Entorno: Retos e Implicaciones. Ingeniería Solidaria, (13)(23). DOI: https://doi.org/10.16925/in.v23i13.1983
Bolton, P. & Dewatripont, M. (1994) The firm as a com- munication network. Quarterly Journal of Economics, (109)(4), 809–839.
Bonabeau, E.; Dorigo, M. & Theraulaz, G. (1999) Swarm Intelligence. From Naural to Artificial Systems. New York: Oxford University Press.
Bonabeau, E. & Meyer, C. (2001) Swarm Intelligence A Whole New Way to Think About Business. Harvard Business Review, 106–114.
Bigley, G. & Roberts, K. (2001) The incident command system: High-reliability organizing for complex and volatile task environments. Academy of Management Journal, (44)(6), 1281-1299.
Chandler, A. D. (1962) Strategy and Structure: Chapters in the History of American Industrial Enterprise. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Chirinos G., M. (2013) Medición de contagio e interdependencia financieros medi- ante cópulas y eventos extremos en los países de la América Latina. El Trimestre Económico, (80)(317), 169-206.
Cohen, W. M. & Levinthal D. A. (1990) Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, (35), 128–152.
Correia, L. (2006) Self-organisation: a case for embodiment, 111–116. In: Proceedings of The Evolution of ComplexityWorkshop at Artificial Life X: The 10th International Conference on the Simulation and Synthesis of Living Systems.
Csaszar, F. A. (2012) Organizational structure as a determinant of performance: Evidence from mutual funds. Strategic Management Journal. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.1969
Cremer, J. (1980) A partial theory of the optimal organization of a bureaucracy. Bell Journal of Economics, (11)(2), 683–693.
Engwall, M. (2003) No project is an island: Linking projects to history and context. Research Policy, (32)(5), 789-808. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00088-4
Floyd, S. W. & Hilb, M. (2013) Discontinuous Change and Organizational Response: Exploring the Moderating Effects of Resources and Capabilities – the Case of Kodak. Academy of Management Journal, (56)(5), 1295–1324.
García-Marí, J. H.; Sánchez-Vidal, J. & Tomaseti-Solano, E. (2016) Fracaso empresarial y efectos contagio Un análisis espacial para España. El Trimestre Económico, (83)(330), 429–449.
Geanakoplos J. & Milgrom P. (1991) A theory of hierarchies based on limited managerial attention. Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, (5)(3), 205–225.
Giesecke, K. & Weber, S. (2006) Credit Contagion and Aggregate Losses. Journal of Economics Dynamics & Control, (30), 741-767.
Green, D. M. & Swets, J. A. (1966) Signal Detection Theory and Psychophysics. New York: Wiley.
Harris, M. & Raviv, A. (2002) Organization design. Management Science, (48)(7), 852–865.
Hart, O. & Moore, J. (2005) On the design of hierarchies: coordination versus specialization. Journal of Political Economy, (113)(4), 675–702.
Helbing, D. (2013) Globally networked risks and how to respond. Nature, (497), 51-59. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature12047
Hilbert, M. (2012) How to measure “how much information”?. Theoretical, methodological, and statistical challenges for the social sciences. International Journal of Communication, (6)(1), 1042–1055.
Holland, John. H. (1998) Emergence: From Chaos to Order. New York, Perseus Books, ISBN.
Hudson, J. (1996) Bankruptcies, Firm Size and Unemployment: A Big Bang Theory of Economic Cycles. Small Business and Economics, (8)(5), 379–388.
Hunsader, K. N.; Delcoure, N. & Pennywell, G. (2013) Competitive Strategy and Industry Contagion Following Traditional Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Announcements. Managerial Finance, (39)(11), 1032-1055.
Hope, K. (2017) Así se trabaja en la empresa de Suecia que decidió no tener jefes. BBC Mundo. En: http://www.bbc.com/mundo/noticias-39007890
Ivory, C. & Alderman, N. (2005) Can project management learn anything from studies of failure in complex systems?. Project Management Journal, (36)(3), 5-16.
Jaafari, A. (2003) Project management in the age of complexity and change, Project Management Journal, (34)(3), 47-57.
Johansson, S.; Löfström, M. & Ohlsson, O. (2007) Separation or integration?. A dilemma when organizing development projects. International Journal Project Management, (25)(5), 457-464.
Jinhua, Z.; Jian, Z.; Haifeng, D. & Sun, W. (2009) Self-organizing genetic algorithm based tuning of PID controllers. Information Sciences, (179)(7), 1007–1018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2008.11.038
Jugdev, K. & Müller, R. (2005) A retroperspective look at our evolving understanding of project success. Project Management Journal, (36)(4), 19-31.
Klijn, E. H. & Teisman, G. R. (2003) Institutional and strategic barriers to public-private partner- ships: An analysis of Dutch cases. Public Money and Management, (23), 137-146.
Kownatzki, M.; Airways, J.; Walter, J. & Floyd, S. W. (2013) Corporate control and the speed of strategic business unit decision making. Academy of Management Journal, (56)(5), 1295–1324. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.0804
March, J. G. (1991) Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, (2), 71–87.
Macmillan, N. A. & Creelman, C. D. (2004) Detection Theory: A User’s Guide. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Maguire, S.; McKelvey, B.; Laurent, M. & Ôztas, N. (2006) Complexity Science and Organization Studies, 165- 214. In: Stewart R. Clegg, Cynthia Hardy, Thomas B. Lawrence & Walter R. (Eds.), Nord, The SAGE Handbook of Organization Studies. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781848608030.n6
Mandelli, A. (2004) Self-Organization and New Hierarchies in Complex Evolutionary Value Networks, 248-305. In: M. Huotari, & M. Iivonen (Eds.), Trust in Knowledge Management and Systems in Organizations. Hershey, PA: IGI Global. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4018/978-159140-126-1.ch010
Mezza-Garcia, N. & Maldonado, C. E. (2015) Crítica al control jerárquico de los regímenes políticos: complejidad y topología. Desafíos, (27)(1), 27–1. En: http://revistas.urosario.edu.co/index.php/desafios/article/view/3632/2654
Miller, K. D.; Zhao, M. & Calantone, R. J. (2006) Adding interpersonal learning and tacit knowledge to March’s exploration-exploitation model. Academy of Management Journal, (49)(4),709-722.
Mitleton-Kelly, E. (2006) A complexity approach to co-creating an innovative environment. World Futures, (62), 223–239. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02604020500509553
Nesmahnow, S. (2004) Algoritmos genéticos paralelos y su aplicación al diseño de redes de comunicaciones confiables. Teisis de maestría. Universidad de la República de Uruguay. En: https://www.colibri.udelar.edu.uy/bitstream/123456789/2932/1/tesis-nesmachnow.pdf
Nicolis, G. & Prigogine, I. (2007) La estructura de lo complejo: En el camino hacia una nueva comprensión de las ciencias. México: Alianza Editorial.
Park, N. K.; Choi, K. & Lee, J. (2015) The Hierarchy Myopia of Organizational Learning. Seoul Journal of Business, (21)(2), 71-104.
Peterson, W.; Birdsall, T. & Fox, W. (1954) The theory of signal detectability. IRE Professional Group on Information Theory, (4)(4), 171–212.
Phan, P. H.; Wright, M.; Ucbasaran, D. & Tan, W. L. (2009) Corporate Entrepreneurship: Current Research and Future Directions. Journal of Business Venturing, (24)(3), 197-205.
Pirson, M. & Turnbull, S. (2011) Corporate Governance, Risk Management, and the Financial Crisis: An Information Processing View. Corporate Governance: An International Review, (19)(5), 459–470. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467- 8683.2011.00860.x
Powell, T. C. (2001) Competitive advantage: logical and philosophical considerations. Strategic Management Journal, (22)(9), 875–888. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.173
Prokopenko, M.; Boschetti, F. & Ryan, A. J. (2009) An information-theoretic primer on complexity, self-organization, and emergence. Complexity. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/cplx.20249
Qian, Y. Y.; Roland, G. & Xu, C. G. (2006) Coordination and experimentation in M-form and Uform organizations. Journal of Political Economy, (114)(2), 366–402.
Radner, R. (1992) Hierarchy: the economics of managing. Journal of Economic Literature, (30)(3), 1382–1415.
Salas-Fumás, V.; Sáenz-Royo, C. & Lozano-Rojo, Á. (2015) Organisational structure and performance of consensus decisions through mutual influences: A computer simulation approach. Decision Support Systems, (86), 61–72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2016.03.008
Sah, R. & Stiglitz, J. (1986) The architecture of economic systems: hierarchies and polyarchies. American Economic Review, (76)(4), 716–727.
Simon, H. A. (1947/1997) Administrative Behavior. New York: Free Press.
Smith, E. B.; Menon, T. & Thompson, L. (2011) Status Differences in the Cognitive Activation of Social Networks. Organization Science, (23)(1), 67–82. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1100.0643
Stacey, R. D. & Stacey, R. D. (1995) The science of complexity: and alternative perspective for strategic change processes. Long Range Planning, (28)(6), 124. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-6301(95)99970-B
Szulanski, G. (1996) Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management Journal, (17)(S2), 27-43.
Stubbart, C. I. & Knight, M. B. (2006) Commentary The cBse of the disappearing firms: Empirical evidence and implications. Joumal of Organizational Behavior J. Organiz. Behav, 27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.l002/job.361
Thiry, M. & Deguire, M. (2004) Program man- agement as an emergent order phenomenon: An inductive longitudinal study in a natural work environment. PMI Research Conference, London.
Torres C. & Toca E. (2014) Inteligencia colectiva: enfoque para el análisis de redes Swarm intelligence: approach to the analysis of networks Inteligência colectiva: abordagem para a análise de redes. Estudios Gerenciales, (30), 259–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.estger.2014.01.014
Tsai, W. C. (2014) Application of Complexity Science Perspective on New Business Development: A Case Study of VISA Organization. The Journal of International Management Studies, (9)(2), 152-163.
Turnbull, S. (2002) A New Way to Govern: Organisations and Society After Enron. SSRN Electronic Journal, (14)(1), 1– 33. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.319867
Turner, K. L. & Makhija, M. V. (2012) The role of individuals in the information processing perspective. Strategic Management Journal. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.1970
Tushman, M. L. & Nadler, D. A. (1978) Information Processing as an Integrating Concept in Organizational Design. Academy of Management Review, 613–624.
Valentine, M. A. & Edmondson, A. C. (2014) Team Scaffolds : How Meso- Level Structures Support Role-based Coordination in Temporary Groups. In: http://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Publication%20Files/12- 062_55befe5d-9ecd-4b42-974f-2b5c026e4769.pdf
Van Zandt, T. (1999) Real-time decentralized information processing as a model of organizations with boundedly rational agents. Review of Economic Studies, (66)(3), 633– 658.
Watts, D. (2006) Seis grados de separación. La ciencia de las redes en la era de acceso. Barcelona: Paidos Iberica S.A.
Wally, S. & Baum, J. R. (1994). Personal and structural determinants of the pace of strategic decision making. Academy of Management Journal, (37), 932– 956.
Weber, M. (1968) Economy and Society, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Williamson, O. E. (1981) The Modern Corporation: Origins, Evolution, Attributes. Journal of Economic Literature, (19)(4), 1537- 1532.
White, L.; Currie, G. & Lockett, A. (2016) Pluralized leadership in complex organizations: Exploring the cross network effects between formal and informal leadership relations. Leadership Quarterly, (27)(2), 280–297. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2016.01.004
Zhang, X.; Wang, D. & Wang, T. (2016) Inspiration or Preparation?. Proceedings of the 25th ACM International on Conference on Information and Knowledge Management. CIKM (16), 741–750.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Instructions for filling in the Certification of Originality and the Copyright Transfer:
Keep in mind that by pressing the "save and continue" button at the end, you are assuming all the ethical and legal commitments set forth herein. They establish the responsibilities of the legislation on intellectual property rights. For this it is assumed that whoever is carrying out the action of presenting the written work in good faith and represents himself and the other authors of the postulated article.
In this sense, the authors retain all the rights of which they are owners and authorize the free reproduction of the document sent. In the event of being necessary, they will assume, by pressing the "save and continue" button, the legal responsibility derived from the patrimonial rights which are free because of the non-payment by any procedure of the Journal.
Consequently, the author (s) represented by the person who advances the postulation of the article for evaluation and eventual publication,
I (We) declare:
1. I am (we are) the author (s) of the article {here is the name of the article placed automatically}.
2. This is an original work in accordance with the intellectual property law of Colombian copyright.
3. The content of the article of the reference has not been published and that it will not be submitted to any other means of publication in written or electronic support before knowing the decision of the Editorial Committee of Dimensión Empresarial.
4. The signer of this certification guarantees that the commitment acquired here does not infringe any third-party rights.
5. The publication authorization includes its electronic file and its adaptation, if necessary, for its incorporation in the network or in any electronic format or database, as well as attaching the necessary metadata to register the work, trademarks of water or any other security or protection system.
6. The publication authorization includes reproduction on digital media. As well as its distribution and making available through institutional archives through the Internet, distribute copies, and exhibit it in Colombia and outside the country, as well as include the article in national and international indexes.
7. The author assumes all responsibility, including compensation for damages, that could be exercised against the Universidad Autónoma del Caribe by third parties who violated their rights and interests because of the assignment.
For its part, Dimension Empresarial undertakes to respect in any case the rights of the author contained in Article 30 of Law 23 of 1982, or any after it and will make the article available to the users of the Journal so that make a legitimate use of it, as permitted by the applicable legislation, provided that its authorship is cited, commercial benefit is not obtained, and derivative works are not made.
The authors agree to accept the conditions of this intellectual property note, which will be applied to this submission when it is published in this journal.
