Who is Who in ICoSS
Business AdvisorsArie de Geus, ex-Shell Academic AdvisorsJohn Casti, Santa Fe Institute & IIASA, Vienna ICoSS Researchers’ ContributionsS Nolas; Researcher IApt6/7 commenced 01/10/02-30/11/04 Contributions include the following: Nolas, Amjad, Savic,Castellano, Bauer, de Zeeuw
Name and grade of researcher: Sevasti-Melissa Nolas I supported the project in all aspects of the research process, from data collection & analysis to theory development and knowledge dissemination via conference presentations and journal publications, as well as relationship development with research partners and presentations at research seminars.
Name and grade of researcher: Urooj Quezon Amjad: Interviewed and analyzed various management levels_ dynamics in private and public organizations in the following key research areas:complexity, organizational change, political knowledge management, strategy, post-merger integration. Maintained strong relationships with contacts in these organizations to ensure the quality and dissemination of the research. During the project work, I independently contributed to project planning in the forms of methodological design, data gathering and analysis, and writing of academic papers as products of the project. As part of a four-person research team, and peripheries of associates, in our group and the university, I extensively coordinated my work with colleagues from various backgrounds (e.g. management, social psychology, economics, physics). One example of the inter-disciplinary collaboration is the ABM modelling questionnaire. Public presentation of our findings and work in progress were presented to both academic and business audiences, therefore tailoring the work to the needs of particular audiences. Any qualifications gained as a result of the project: Attended Flash MX website design course at Hoxton Bibliotech, London, approximately from September 2003--January 2004. Slavica Savic Part of my contribution was to maintain strong relationships with contacts in Business and the LSE, to ensure the dissemination of the research findings. I have initiated and explored different ways of communicating and exchanging knowledge within the group and with our supporting community through websites, filming and workshops and seminars. I contributed to the project planning in various forms of team building, ensured and supported delivering of the objectives. I have initiated and chaired the monthly Plan Meetings where we regularly updated on the research outputs and objectives, developing the project’s network and team support. During the last two years worked as a part time Project Manager covering the administrative side of that role. Subsequent employment: Research Officer at the London Multimedia Lab, Institute of Social Psychology, LSE Mr. Eduardo Castellano. 1) Presentations at the LSE: Castellano, E. 2003. Applying Complexity Principles and the Exploration vs. Exploitation Cycle Framework to the Analysis of FSTO Organizational Dilemmas. LSE Complexity Research Programme Workshop, 18th June. London School of Economics (UK) Castellano, E. 2003. New Organizational Forms and Networks Literature Review. LSE Complexity Research Programme Working Paper Castellano, E. 2003. CONNECTIVITY. LSE Complexity Research Programme Workshop, 15th July. London School of Economics (UK) Castellano, E. 2003. Linking SNA and ABM. LSE Complexity Research Programme Workshop, 3rd April. London School of Economics (UK) 2) Development of a Complexity Research Programme at Mondragón (MCC), named as the Mondragón Complexity Node: Partners: LSE: www.lse.ac.uk/complexity C-Node Goal: “This Node works from an action research approach. Therefore, from the academic towards practical perspective, we study how complexity, system thinking and network theory help us to understand, design and manage the dynamic organizational structures, the intra-inter organizational network relationships and their enabling frameworks. And, on the other hand, the Node uses these experiences as case studies, from a practical towards academic perspective, in order to extend these theories due to the feedback from real organizational practices.” Actions: Exystence Complexity Seminar that took place in Bilbao, Oct. 2003. Projects launched jointly: …already approved TITTLE: Computational Lab for the Design and Development of Complex Supply Networks …in process of evaluation TITTLE: Innovative co-evolutionary framework for SMEs to facilitate continuous restructuring
Ruben Bauer, M.Sc. (until this March) or D.Sc. (from April on). Paper "Organizations, Knowledge, Complexity", currently in process of appreciation for publication. Authors: BAUER, Ruben, VALLE, Rogerio, MITLETON-KELLY, Eve. (this paper draws on the SIW case, references to the company being supressed). Abstract: In a recursive progression, this article pursues three themes: the ways in which external and internal complexities are addressed in organizations; the different kinds of knowledge and their relevance to organizations; and the validity of applying, in organizations, concepts originating in what is called complexity theory. It then outlines how to go beyond traditional organization theories, which are directed to resolving or reducing complexity, on an approach that both welcomes and benefits from it. Any qualifications gained as a result of the project:
Co-investigator: Gerard de Zeeuw, Professor at the University of Lincoln (area: research in business and law; since 1994); Professor Emeritus of the University of Amsterdam (area: complex social systems, in particular the mathematical modelling of innovation; since 1973) Support to data analysis. General methodological information. Theories of interaction and complexity Publishing activity: Co-editor (with Nolas, Garcia-Lorenzo and Sell-Trujillo) of a special issue of the World Futures Journal on Complexity and Innovation Zeeuw, G. de (2004), Self-organisation as quality control in inquiry. Kybernetes, 33-9/10, p. 1411-1418 Knowledge is defined as the result of successful attempts to transfer expected effort in the future to effort spent in the present. The less effort remains to be spent in the future, the more knowledge is exhaustive and complete. It is shown that some efforts remain necessary in the future for accidental reasons, e.g. to correct mistakes, to estimate parameters, to act. Some efforts will also be required for fundamental reasons. They are needed to compensate as and when testing for exhaustiveness proves ineffective. It is argued that the need for such additional effort may be met by starting collectives as a form of pre-containment. Such collectives may include non-ordered experiences. They will maintain themselves by striving to serve as equivalents to knowledge. They help in two ways: they indicate what is needed to create which knowledge. The design of collectives serving as knowledge is linked to second order cybernetics. |





