"Effective managers and professional in all walks of life have to become skilled in the art of "reading" the situations they are attempting to organize or manage... Skilled leaders and managers develop the knack of reading situations with various scenarios in mind and of forging actions that seem appropriate to the understandings thus obtained. They have a capacity to remain open and flexible, suspending immediate judgments whenever possible, until a more comprehensive view of the situation emerges. They are aware that new insights often arise as one approaches situations from "new angles" and that a wide and varied reading can create a wide and varied range of possibilities."

"This book explores and develops the art of reading and understanding organizational life. It is based on a very simple premise: that all theories of organization and management are based on implicit images or metaphors that lead us to see, understand, and manage organizations in distinctive yet partial ways....The use of metaphor implies a way of thinking and a way of seeing that pervade how we understand our world generally."

"We use metaphor whenever we attempt to understand one element of an experience in terms of another. Thus, metaphor proceeds through implicit or explicit assertions that A is (or is like) B. When we say "the man is a lion," we use the image of a lion to draw attention to the lion-like aspects of the man. The metaphor frames our understanding of the man in a distinctive yet partial way. One of the interesting aspects of metaphor is that it always produces this kind of one-sided insight. In highlighting certain interpretations it tends to force others into a background role... Another interesting feature rests in the fact that metaphor always creates distortions.... The man is a lion. He is brave, strong, and ferocious. But he is not covered inn fur and does not have four legs, sharp teeth, and a tail!"

"When we approach metaphor in this way we see that our simple premise that all theory is metaphor has far-reaching consequences. We have to accept that any theory or perspective that we bring to the study of organization and management, while capable of creating valuable insights, is also incomplete, and potentially misleading....Metaphor is inherently paradoxical. It can create powerful insights that also become distortions, as the way of seeing created through a metaphor becomes a way of not seeing."

"One of the most basic problems of modern management is that the mechanical way of thinking is so ingrained in our everyday conceptions of organization that it is often difficult to organize in any other way."

"Set goals and objectives and go for them. Organize rationally, efficiently, and clearly. Specify every detail so that everyone will be sure of the jobs that they have to perform. Plan, organize, and control, control, control. These and other similar ideas are often ingrained in our way of thinking about organization and in the way we evaluate organizational practice. For many people, it is almost second nature to organize by setting up a structure of clearly defined activities linked by clear lines of communication, coordination, and control."

"The strengths and limitations of the machine as a metaphor for organization are reflected in the strengths and limitations of mechanistic organization in practice."

"The strengths can be stated very simply. Mechanistic approaches to organization work well only under conditions where machines work well: (a) when there is a straightforward task to perform; (b) when the environment is stable enough to ensure that the products produced will be appropriate ones; (c) when one wishes to produce exactly the same product time and again; (d) when precision is at a premium; and (e) when the human "machine" parts are compliant and behave as they have been designed to do."

"Some organizations have had spectacular success using the mechanistic model because these conditions are fulfilled....McDonaldÕs and many firms in the fast-food industry provide the best examples...Surgical wards, aircraft maintenance departments, finance offices, courier firms, and other organizations where precision, safety, and clear accountability are at a premium are also often able to implement mechanistic approaches successfully, at least in certain aspects of their operations."

"However, despite these successes, mechanistic approaches to organization often have severe limitations. In particular they (a) can create organizational forms that have great difficulty in adapting to changing circumstances; (b) can result in mindless and unquestioning bureaucracy; (c) can have unanticipated and undesirable consequences as the interests of those working in the organization take precedence over the goals the organization was designed to achieve; (d) can have dehumanizing effects upon employees, especially those at the lower levels of the organizational hierarchy."

"Mechanistically structured organizations have great difficulty adapting to changing circumstances because they are designed to achieve predetermined goals; they are not designed for innovation."

"Changing circumstances call for different kinds of action and response. Flexibility and capacities for creative action become more important than narrow efficiency. It becomes more important to do the right thing in a way that is timely and "good enough" than to do the wrong thing well or the right thing late."

"The hierarchical organization of jobs builds on the idea that control must be exercised over the different parts of the organization (to ensure that they are doing what they are designed to do), rather than being build into to parts themselvesÉMuch of the apathy, carelessness, and lack of pride so often encountered in the modern workplace is thus not coincidental: it is fostered by the mechanistic approach."

"A final set of problems relate to human consequences. The mechanistic approach to organization tends to limit rather than mobilize the development of human capacities, molding human beings to fit the requirements of mechanical organizations rather than building the organization around their strengths and potentials. Both employees and organizations lose from this arrangement. Employees lose opportunities for personal growth, often spending hours a say on work they neither value nor enjoy, and organizations lose the creative and intelligent contributions that most employees are capable of making, given the right opportunities."

"Mechanistic approaches to organization have proved incredibly popular, partly because of their efficiency in the performance of tasks that can be successfully routinized partly because they offer managers the promise of tight control over people and their activities. In stable times, the approach worked from a managerial point of view. But with the increasing pace of social and economic change, the limitations have become more and more obvious."

Images of the brain - "More recently, the brain has been compared with a holographic system...When it comes to brain functioning it seems that there is no center of point of control. The brain seems to store and process data in many parts simultaneously. Pattern and order emerge from the process; it is not imposed....But the holographic explanation can go too far in that it underplays the fact that despite the distributed character there is also a strong measure of system specialization. The brain, it seems, is both holographic and specialized!

"Single-loop learning rests in an ability to detect and correct error in relation to a given set of operating norms. Double-loop learning depends on being able to take a "double look" at the situation by questioning the relevance of operating norms."

"...many organizations have become proficient at single-loop learning, developing an ability to scan the environment, set objectives, and monitor the general performance of the system in relation to these objectives...However, the ability to achieve proficiency at double-loop learning often proves more elusive. Although some organizations have been successful in institutionalizing system that review and challenge basic paradigm and operating norms, many fail to do so. This failure is especially true of bureaucratized organizations, whose fundamental organizing principles often operate in a way that actually obstructs the learning process."

"The metaphor (brain) invites us to rethink key management principles in a way that lays the foundation for a completely new theory of management. Consider, for example, how an understanding of the functioning of the brain challenges traditional assumptions about the importance of strong central leadership and control; about the wisdom of setting clear goals and objectives; about the role of hierarchy; and about the concept of organizational design; and the wisdom of trying to develop and impose systems from the top down."

"...in developing the importance of the brain as a way of creating capacities for learning and self-organization there is a danger of overlooking important conflicts that can arise between learning and self-organization, on the one hand, and the realities of power and control, on the other. Any move away from hierarchically controlled structures toward more flexible, emergent patterns has major implications for the distribution of power and control within an organization, as the increase in autonomy granted to self-organizing units undermines the ability of those with ultimate power to keep a firm hand on day-to-day activities and developments. Moreover, the process of learning requires a degree of openness and self-criticism that is foreign to traditional modes of management. Both of these factors tend to generate resistance from the status quo. Managers are often reluctant to trust self-organizing processes among their staff and truly "let go." Many early experiments in self-organizing work designs encountered this problem, and many still do. There is such a strong belief that order means clear structure and hierarchical control that any alternative seems to be a jump in the direction of anarchy and chaos. As has been suggested, successful self-organizing systems always require a degree of hierarchical ordering. But this hierarchy must be allowed to emerge and change as different elements of the system take a lead in making their various contributions. In such systems, hierarchy and control have an emergent quality; they cannot be pre-designed and imposed."

"Although it is common to draw a clear distinction between the two (organization and environment), it seems systemically wiser to view organization and environment as elements of the same interconnected pattern. In evolution, it is pattern that evolves." In recent years major insights on how this occurs have emerged from two related lines of development: the theory of chaos and self-organization on the one hand and complexity theory on the other. Using physical experiments and computer simulations as metaphors for understanding what happens in nature, they contribute important elements to a holistic theory of change."

Complex nonlinear systems like ecologies or organizations are characterized by multiple systems of interaction that are both ordered and chaotic. Because of this internal complexity, random disturbances can produce unpredictable events and relationships that reverberate throughout a system, creating novel patterns of change. The amazing thing, however, is that despite all the unpredictability, coherent order always emerges out of the randomness and surface chaos."

"Whether we are examining the flocking of birds, the changing relationships between predators and prey...the hive behavior of bees, or the way in which organizations and social systems get transformed over time, it seems that we can detect common processes of spontaneous self-organization. If a system has a sufficient degree of internal complexity, randomness and diversity and instability becomes resources for change. New order is a natural outcome."

"Complex systems seem to have a natural tendency to get caught in tensions....falling under the influence of different attractors that ultimately define the contexts in which detailed system behaviors unfold....Create a context defined by a few simple points of reference that are equivalent to the "minimum specs"...and random fluctuations will self-organize into a coherent form. Chaos theorists have noted that complex systems can fall under the influence of different types of attractors. Some pull a system into states of equilibrium or near equilibrium, for example, as a result of negative feedback loops that counteract destabilizing fluctuations. Other attractors have a tendency to flip a system into completely new configurations...this illustrates how a system can be drawn under the influence of different sets of reference points that in effect define competing contexts. The detailed behavior depends on which context dominates."

"In explaining how systems can transform themselves in this way, chaos theorists have become particularly interested in understanding what happens when a system is "pushed" far from equilibrium toward an "edge of chaos" situation. Here, it encounters "bifurcation points" that are rather like "forks in the road" leading to different futures. At such points the energy within the system can self-organize through unpredictable leaps into different system states....Bifurcation points and associated "attractors" always exist as latent potentials within any complex nonlinear system. They signal potentials for self-organization and the evolution of new form. However, the path of system evolution is completely unpredictable, because, given the complexity and non-linearity, seemingly insignificant changes can unfold to create large effects.

"Quantum and qualitative change, incrementally!"

Rethinking organization - "Instead of seeing these qualities (order and organization) as states that can be externally imposed on a situation through hierarchical means, or through predetermined logic that we bring to the design of bridges or buildings, managers are invited to view them as emergent properties. New order emerges in any complex system that, because of internal and external fluctuations is pushed into "edge of chaos" situations. Order is natural! It is emergent and free! But most interesting of all, its precise nature can never be planned or predetermined."

The art of managing and changing "context" - A second extremely important implication of a chaos-complexity perspective rests in the idea that the fundamental role of managers is to shape and create "contexts" in which appropriate forms of self-organization can occur. As has been noted, the implicit rules, reference points, or "minimum specs" that define an "attractor" create a context in which a system can acquire detailed empirical form...The focus on attractor patterns thus creates a powerful perspective for the management of stability and the management of change, suggesting that transformational change ultimately involves the creation of "new contexts" that can break the hold of dominant attractor patterns in favor of new ones...New contexts can be created by generating new understandings of a situation, or by engaging in new actions. New understandings can transform the autopoietic processes of self-reference through which a system produces and reproduces its basic sense of identity. This can be achieved by exposing the system to new information about itself or its environment and by encouraging...double-loop learning....New context can also be created by engaging in new actions that help to push the system into a new state more directly. Experiments, prototypes, changes in rewards, changes in key personnel...can by themselves embody powerful messages that catalyze other changes in the context as the system adjusts itself to the new reality. While new understandings can create a heightened sense of the need for change, and a direction in which an organization may feel it needs to go, new actions help to get it there. The conventional way of thinking about organizational change puts these in a sequential order. But from a chaos perspective they often need to be reversed. New action can catalyze new understandings."

Using small changes to create large effects - A third major implication of the chaos-complexity perspective, and one that brings a great deal of pragmatism to the task of managing and changing contexts, rests in the idea that in "edge of chaos" situations, small but critical changes at critical times can trigger major transforming effects...it follows that any person wishing to change the context in which they are operating should search for "doable" high-leverage initiatives that can trigger a transition from one attractor to another. Chaos theory also gives clear indications of where they should look for these initiatives. As will be recalled, the tensions between competing attractors generate "bifurcation points" leading to different paths of future development. Most often these manifest themselves as paradoxes or tensions between the status quo and alternative future states...The chaos manager must recognize these "forks in the road" and create a context supporting the new line of development by finding interventions that transcend the paradoxes or make them irrelevant For examples, by creating a successful prototype, or by getting key opinion leaders behind the initiative, he or she may be able to create the crucial time and space in which success can be demonstrated, publicized and made irreversible. The challenge of managing complex systems often seems completely overwhelming. The complexity defies comprehensive analysis, and it is often difficult to know where to intervene. The above principles encourage us to cut through this complexity and focus on a few key principles that offer the promise of achieving quantum change incrementally! In much of the management literature quantum change and incremental change are seen as opposites. Quantum change is seen as being produced through large initiatives. Incremental change is viewed as the route to marginal improvements. While this is true under conditions of linearity, in complex nonlinear systems small incremental changes can produce large quantum effects. If people focus on finding high-leverage initiatives within their sphere of influence that have the capacity to shift the context, potential for major change can be unleashed. There are at least two ways in which this potential can unfold. First, small changes may in themselves catalyze a major change, because the change itself proves pivotal....Second, small changes can also create a critical mass effect. Though small and insignificant in themselves, together they build an overwhelming force."

Living with emergence as a natural state of affairs - "In complex systems no one is ever in a position to control or design system operations in a comprehensive way. Form emerges. It cannot be imposed, and there are no end states. At best, would-be managers have to be content with an ability to nudge and push a system in a desired direction by shaping critical parameters that can influence the course of system evolution....Successful experiments can go a long way in creating a foothold on a new reality. In particular, they offer important insights on the feedback loops and defensive routines that sustain a dominant attractor pattern and what can be done to help a new one emerge....The chaos manager must also develop a heightened awareness of the importance of "boundary management." As noted earlier, new experiments often get neutralized by the status quo. It is thus vital that the chaos manager become skilled in the art of managing boundaries: building them when it is necessary to shield an initiative from the forces of the old attractor, and breaking them when the initiative is strong enough to survive on its own."

Being open to new metaphors that can facilitate self-organization - "New images and metaphors of the managerÕs role are often needed...to cope with the ambiguity, paradox, pressures, and uncertainties that the absence of fixed states and clear end points entails...The research on chaos and complexity is full of resonant images based on the behavior of termite colonies, beehives, and other processes that illustrate the nature of self-organizing systems. They provide a valuable resource for carrying organization and management theory into a new domain."

The first step in the successful management of paradox rests in recognizing that both dimensions of the contradictions that accompany change usually have merit. The second vital step....rests in finding ways of creating contexts that can mobilize and retain desirable qualities of both sides while minimizing the negative dimensions. All the skills of managing in the midst of complexity, discussed earlier..., are relevant here. To the extent that the paradoxes created by change remain unaddressed, they become the stalemating context.

"The whole idea that change is an emergent phenomenon offers a powerful mind-set for managing change. It encourages us to gain a reflective understanding of the logic driving the flux around us and to nudge and shape the logic wherever we can. Yet it also requires us to recognize that we can never be "in control." The message is that, even though our actions shape and are shaped by change, we are just part of an evolving pattern. The challenge, of course, is to cope with this paradox: By recognizing that even though we cannot exert unilateral power of control over any complex system, we can act through the power and control that we actually do have. Using the image popularized by chaos theorists, the invitation is to recognize that although we may be no more than "butterflies" in terms of our power on the overall system we can have enormous effects, especially when we use our insights about system dynamics and the nature of change to determine how and where to intervene. And, of course, the more butterflies the better!"