You cannot step twice into the same river as other waters are continually flowing.

(Heraclitus)

Flux and Transformation

Flux: the action or process of flowing or flowing
out.
Heraclitus recognized that whilst there is nothing
fundamentally new under the sun, nevertheless the
whole universe is in a constant state of flux with nothing
fixed.
He believed the secrets of the universe could be found
in finding patterns in the changes that take place.
He also addresses that the universe is in a constant
stage of flux embodying features of both permanence
and change

Organisations as Flux and

Transformation
This is the metaphor which leads us to areas like chaos,
complexity, paradox etc
It views organization as a part of environment not
separate from it
It helps us observe how change happens in a turbulent
world.
The Managers can nudge and shape its progress, but
cannot be in control of change

Morgan's key beliefs about organizational change

Order naturally emerges out of chaos.
Organizations have a natural capacity to self-renew.
Organizational life is not governed by the rules of cause
and effect.
Key tensions are important in the emergence of new
ways of doing things.
The formal organizational structure (teams, hierarchies)
only represents one of many dimensions of
organizational life

Keep Imagining a Whirlpool which ,while

possessing a relatively constant form, has no
existence other than movement in the river
Think what it might take to change its configuration. The
slides ahead seek to explain the nature of Organizational
Whirlpool
1. Why do they exist
2. How do they sustain themselves
3. What can be done to influence their course

Morgan addresses four logics of change :

Autopoiesis Rethinking Relations with the Environment

Shifting Attractors -The Logic of Chaos & complexity
Loops, not Lines - The Logic of Mutual causality
Contradiction and Crisis The Logic of Dialectical
change

Autopoesis Self Creation

This new approach to systems theory was developed by
Maturana and Varela. According to them
All living systems are organizationally closed and make
reference only to themselves
living systems to be characterized by
autonomy,circularityandself-reference. These three
features allow the system to self-create or self-renew.
The aim of autopoietic systems is to produce
themselves and therefore their own organization and
identity is paramount.

Main implications of the theory

Organizations are always attempting to achieve selfreferential closure enacting their environments as
extensions of their own identity.
Many of the problems that organizations encounter are
a result of their attempt to maintain a particular identity.
Explanations of organizationalevolution, change and
development must give attention to the factors that
shape patterns affecting organizations.

Identity and Closure: Egocentric Vs

Systemic Wisdom
Morgan contrasts what he calls egocentric organizations with systemic wisdom.

The EgoCentric Orgn have a fixed notion of who or what they are and are
determined to sustain this at all costs.

This leads them to overemphasize the importance of themselves while underplaying

the significance of the wider system of relations in which they exist. Example:
watchmakers and typewriter firms failing to take account of developments in microprocessing and
digital technologies. Their identity as producing a certain kind of equipment led to their downfall .

Contrasted with this is the idea of systemic wisdom where organizations have an
evolving identity. Morgan believes that organizations can never survive
beingagainsttheir environment:
In the long run, survival can only be survivalwith, never survival against, the
environment or context in which one is operating.

The Challenge presented by Theory of Autopoiesis

is to understand
How Organisations change and Transform themselves
alongwith their environments
To Develop approaches to Organisations that can foster
the kind of open ended evolution
To be successful, therefore, Organizations must be willing
and able to transform themselves along with their
environment in an evolutionary manner.

Shifting Attractors: The Logic of Chaos

n Complexity
This is of the view that complex non linear systems like Organisations are
characterized by multiple systems of interaction that are both ordered and chaoctic
Although it is usual to draw a clear distinction between chaos and complexity, ,
it makes more sense in terms of organizations and their environments to consider
them to be parts of the same interconnected (evolving) pattern.
Random disturbances can produce unpredictable events and relationships.
However, coherent orderalwaysemerges out of the randomness and surface
chaos.
Small changes can lead to huge consequences. Ex: the butterfly effect where a
small and insignificant event such as a butterfly flapping its wings in China can
influence weather patterns on the other side of the world. The butterfly
doesntcausein any meaningful sense the hurricane, but the tiny change it causes
in its environment leads to another change and another change, and so on

5 key ideas for Managers & Leaders to

cope in face of such chaos and complexity
Rethinking what we mean by organization especially in
terms of hierarchy and control
Learning the art of managing and changing contexts
Learning how to use small changes to create large effects
Living with continuous transformation and emergent order
as a natural state of affairs
Being open to new metaphors that can facilitiate processes
of self-organization

Loops, Not Lines: The Logic of

Mutual Causality
Change, according to the theories outlined above, does
not unfold in a linear fashion but via circular patterns
(loops not lines).
A does not cause B under such a system. Instead both A
and B are co-defined as a consequence of belonging to
the same system of circular relations.
Its states that individuals are able to influence system
dynamics through examining the interaction of +ve and
ve feedback loops and shaping these as necessary

Contd..
Magorah Maruyama, a Japan cybernetician states that positive
feedback loops can lead to complex systems
He has developed this kind of loop analysis showing how positive
feedback accounts for differentiation of complex systems
An example.
A large homogenous plain attracts a farmer, who settles on a given spot.
Other farmers follow, and one of them opens a tool shop. The shop becomes a
meeting place, and a food stand is established next to the shop. Gradually, a
village grows as merchants, suppliers, farmhands, and others are attracted to
it The homogenous plain has been transformed by a series of positive
feedback loops that amplify the effects of the initial differentiation

Contd.
Often, human nature makes us want to explain and
analyze situations in terms of finding a specific cause.
However, phenomenaactuallyreside within overall
patterns of positive and negative feedback
Many systems are unstable because of delayed
feedback between elements which leads to employees
either underplaying or exaggerating their behaviours

Morgan seems to be a great believer in loop

analysis and presents some of his reasons for
thinking so. Here are three of them
Loop Analysis
cultivates systemic wisdom the approaching of
organizational problems from a mindset that respects
patterns of mutual causality.
provides insights on how small changes can have large
effects.
invites us to understand the patterns that lock the
system into vicious circles because of positive feedback
loops.

Contradiction and Crisis The Logic of Dialectical

change

The Study of Opposites

It is a truism that we cannot fully understand something without
knowing its opposite.
You cannot truly know the meaning of hot unless you understand
what cold means.
You cannot conceive of day without knowing night. And so on.
Dialectical philosophy has a long history and tradition, major..
through Taoist philosophy which originated in ancient China. It
understands the universe to be subject to the dynamic interplay
ofyin andyang, creative and destructive powers.

Dialectical principles
Principle 1 The mutual struggle or Unity of Opposites.
Whenever one person attempts to control another, a process of resistance undermines that attempt. The act of
controlitself sets up consequences that work against its effectiveness. It accounts for process of self generated change,
whereby phenomena change themselves as a result of tension with the opposite
Principle 2 Negations of negations retain something from that form, leading to an evolution in patterns of control.
It explains how change may become developmental in the sense that each negation rejects a previous form, yet also
retains something from that form
Principle 3 Changes in quantity lead to changes in quality.
Water absorbs increases in its temperature up to the boiling point. Camels can be loaded until the straw that breaks its
back. A process of control and counter control may continue until control is no longer possible, leading to a new phase of
collaborative or destructive activity.
As we put these
principles together we observe that organizational arrangements set up contradictions and
oppositionby their very nature. This leads to process of negation and counter-negation., which continues until a limit is
reached and the qualitative state of the organization must changed or be destroyed.

Dialectical Management
The Analysis
Management

had

major

implications

for

the

Restructuring is not a solution to a problem as it is itself

a manifestation of a deeper problem. Instead, they
should be dealt with through social and political
initiatives. Contradictions can only be tackled through
an appreciation of what is creating the context in which
they are able to flourish.
Managers and leaders cannot wait for macro-problems

Managing paradox
If not managed properly, new initiatives or directions instituted to cause positive organizational change
can become mired in paradoxical tensions that undermine the desired change
Although there may be ways of resolving the paradoxes, the fact that the tensions areexperienced as
contradictorymay in itself be sufficient to negate transformational change. For example, if
peoplefeelthat the new demands for more innovation, improved morale, more collaboration,
increased decentralization, and so on, are inconsistent with what seems reasonable or possible, inertia is
the most likely outcome
Does that mean that - leaders and managers, although being explicit about the organizational vision,
should keep the purpose of other changes and maneuvers hidden as this could prejudice their outcome?
Paradox cannot be resolved by eliminating one side. (Morgan) The task of the manager or leader is to find
a way to integrate competing elements. They mustcreate new contextsthat reframe the key
contradictions in a positive way.
Ex : Japanese manufacturers have transformed a traditional paradox by showing how improving
quality - by eliminating waste, simplying processes, etc. can lead to lower costs.

*Paradox: a statement that is self contradictory because it often contains two statements that are both true, but in
general, cannot both be true at the same time.
*Inertia : a tendency to do nothing or to remain unchanged.
*Mired : cause to become stuck in mud

Creative destruction
Dialectical processes directly affect innovation.
New innovations lead to the destruction of established practice and displace old
innovations. In turn, the solutions the innovations provide create a new set of
problems, which require new innovations. And so on.the cycle continues.
This leads to important implications that innovations create the basis for their
own downfall.
Many companies embrace the above and succeed in chaotic and turbulent
environments because they systematically destroy the breakthroughs created by
their own products and initiatives by coming up with better ones.. (Apple,
Samsung, Intel etc..)
Although so-called creative destruction can be a powerful tool, its leaders must
take care that it is not over-emphasized. Destruction should be a by-product of
evolution, not a conscious aim.

Strengths and Weakness of Flux

Metaphor
Strengths
Offers new understandings of the nature and source of
change.
Offers new horizons of thought that can be used to enrich
our understanding of management and leadership.
Offers to leaders and managers a powerful new perspective
on their role in facilitating emergent change.
Limitation
Individuals as Managers and Leaders may not be comfortable
with the concept of powerless power