Complexity Continued

I have pondered for several weeks now exactly how to define “complexity”. One can easily retreat to principles like complex systems being typified by emergent behaviour. These are evidences of a complex system. One could sum them up in the aphorism “The whole is more than the sum of its parts” – but extend this to say that at times the whole is less than the sum of its parts. And that aphorism would come close to capturing a key element of complexity.

Perhaps to better understand this concept it is worth considering the scientific method. As pointed out by Gharajedaghi, in the scientific method the whole is NO MORE than the sum of its parts i.e. A=B+C+D. The scientific method then suggests that, for example, we hold C and D constant and they measure the impact of varying B on the sum of the parts (A). Under the scientific method this allows the scientist to actually understand more about the nature of B and how it affects A.

Complex systems, on the other hand, do not necessarily reflect a direct correlation between variations in A as a result of varying B. The outcome may actually vary from analysis to analysis. To take the concept just a little further, varying B,C or D or any combination of these three may result in the same outcome with respect to A. Clearly something else is impacting the changing nature of the outcome.

 Complexity analysis looks at A, B, C and D as a collective which interacts as a system.  Furthermore A, B, C and D are understood to be independently acting, purposeful systems – systems which seek their own outcomes. Thus the outcome reflects the results of a continuous, struggle to find a balance between the purposes of the independent elements and the purpose of the collective higher system. Clearly this is that nature of social systems.

It explains, for example, the behaviour noted by the Tavistock Institute team in the productivity of coal seam mining as a result of new technologies. It is also explains why, for example, Government policies fail first contact with the public. The recent debacle surrounding the well intended insulation subsidy scheme is a good example. In time the thinking surrounding the so called “Super Tax” on the mining industry will need to understand how to trade the purposes of the various elements to achieve a desirable outcome.

I guess the final important thing to note here is that understanding and shaping behaviour in complex systems is not a one off event. The trade between purposeful elements is a continuous negotiation between individual purposes and the higher purposes of any system.