Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Recurso digital |
| Language: | |
| Published: |
Zenodo
2026
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18309206 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Table of Contents:
- <p>This article offers a conceptual critique of the use of complex adaptive systems (CAS) in complexity leadership studies. Although<br>CAS has become a central construct in this literature, its application is often assumed rather than examined. Drawing on established CAS criteria (Benbya & McKelvey, 2006), the paper evaluates whether commonly cited examples such as teams, healthcare, organizations, traffic, and weather actually meet the defining features of CAS. The analysis shows that, apart from sensitivity to initial conditions, these examples seldom satisfy the criteria and that leading texts in the field contain internal inconsistencies in their treatment of CAS. The findings suggest that CAS should be regarded less as an existing organizational reality and more as an idealized state or latent potential that organizations may approximate under specific conditions. By clarifying these limits, the paper strengthens theoretical rigor in complexity leadership and highlights the need to distinguish metaphorical from empirical use.</p>