Tore Bakken

Implications of Self-Reference: Niklas Luhmann’s Autopoiesis and Organization Theory:

This article reviews the potential of Niklas Luhmann’s autopoiesis as a contribution to organization theory. We consider organization theory to consist of three epistemological foundations, which we label equilibrium-based theory, process-based theory and recursivity-based theory. We review critically Luhmann’s autopoietic theory in relation to each of these three foundations. We suggest that whereas it deviates radically from equilibrium-based theory and deviates significantly from process-based theory, it holds potential in its complementarity with Giddens’s structuration theory in providing a promising basis for recursivity-based organization theory.

Organizing is Both a Verb and a Noun: Weick Meets Whitehead

Weick’s work on organizing and sensemaking has contributed significantly towards efforts in organization theory to explore organization as process. His discussion of the relationship between verbs and nouns in particular has served to highlight central dynamic features of processes. Weick’s conception of the verb-noun relationship is one of tension between levels of analysis. We propose, drawing upon the work of Alfred North Whitehead, to draw attention to the formation of nouns and how verbs shape nouns and vice versa. We argue that Weick’s work may be extended by looking more closely at the selection of verbs and nouns, i.e. by looking at how selection may be made on the basis of their relationality, thus allowing for their mutual transformation. We illustrate our point using the imagery provided by the ‘pseudopod’.

Chapter 4 Innovation and Organization: An Overview from the Perspective of Luhmann's Autopoiesis

Few words in modern society have become as positively charged as the word innovation. Of course, premodern societies were also innovative in their way. Still, technology, ideas, and organizational forms have changed over time, and it is only in modern society that innovation has become almost mandatory; that is to say, ranked uppermost in societys value system. “Be innovative!” has become an imperative in modern society.

Ignorance and Organization Studies

The article discusses ignorance and organization studies, both as a topic of study and a basic problem of organization theory understood as design theory. How should we regard knowledge not yet known? Is the development of knowledge a straightforward illumination of a defined box, or does knowledge also have a dark side, growing even faster than the illuminated side? In this article, we propose that more extended research into ignorance in organization studies is needed. And since ignorance is a product of inattention, we draw on Herbert Simon’s investigation into the science of the artificial. Among the topics we explore are unpredictable environments, the interface between inner and outer environments, vagueness and unspecified ignorance.

Chapter 9 An Autopoietic Understanding of “Innovative Organization”

To be innovative is increasingly considered an imperative in modern society. The motto seems to be “the more, the better,” which is echoed in writings about phenomena such as “disruptive technologies” (Christensen, 1997), “disruptive innovations” (Christensen & Raynor, 2003), or radical innovation (Stringer, 2000; Leifer et al., 2000). Such phenomena are typically held up against “anti-innovative” phenomena, for example, “disruptive” is contrasted with “continuous,” and “radical” is contrasted with “incremental.” Distinctions drawn between being more or less innovative derive in part from studies that are based on stable causal factors that explain why some organizations happen to be more innovative than others.