‘Organizing’, ‘Innovating’ and ‘Managing’ in Complexity Space

Michael C. Moldoveanu

Working Paper | HBS Working Paper Series | 2019

‘Organizing’, ‘Innovating’ and ‘Managing’ in Complexity Space

by Michael C. Moldoveanu

Abstract

We two-dimensional measure of organizational complexity that distinguishes between the informational and computational dimensions of complexity and aims to function as a maximally context-invariant environment for posing fundamental questions about organizational dynamics, akin to the role and function of a phase space in classical mechanics. The new measure and associated space allows us to understand the effects of a researcher’s or manager’s choice of model or representation on the resulting complexity measure of a phenomenon and to measure the complexity of any organizational phenomenon that can be represented in a form amenable to an algorithmic description. We use the new complexity measure to present a unified treatment of complexity coping mechanisms, complexity-driven organizational failure and complexity-adaptive innovation and draw new distinctions enabling new questions whose answers will be useful to researchers and executives alike.

Keywords: organizational dynamics; Organizations; Complexity; Adaptation; Innovation and Invention;

Language: English

Format: Print

47 pages

Read Now

Citation:

Moldoveanu, Michael C. "‘Organizing’, ‘Innovating’ and ‘Managing’ in Complexity Space." Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 19-128, June 2019.

We examine the future of executive education on a technological and cultural landscape that is imminent but different to the one we are accustomed to. We show how the contextualization, socialization and personalization of learning—avowed but distal goals of current executive education programs—are made real by the integration of a suite of currently available technologies and ways of using them that bring learners together in dense and intimate learning networks (socialization), powered by semantic and social search technologies that adapt content to individual learners’ styles and preferences (personalization) and can be deployed in the setting of the learners’ own organizations (contextualization)—all of which serve to optimize the learning production function for both skill acquisition and skill transfer—the two charges that the new skills economy has laid out for any educational enterprise.

Executive education worldwide has entered a period of disruption catalyzed by the digitalization of content, connectivity, and communication—while the demand for managerial skills is growing. The forces of disintermediation, disaggregation, and decoupling are creating an unprecedented increase in the nature and number of education options available to companies seeking to increase their skill and capability base. Based on an extensive survey of the industry informed partly by a large set of in-depth interviews with chief talent and learning officers, participants, and providers, we introduce a compass that will help CEO’s and CLOs navigate the emerging landscape of executive education and a parallel compass for designer of executive programs faced with a new industry dynamic and technology curves that open up numerous design and re-design options.

Article | Harvard Business Review | March–April 2019

The Future of Leadership Development

Das Narayandas and Mihnea Moldoveanu

The need for leadership development has never been more urgent. Companies of all sorts realize that to survive in today’s volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous environment, they need different leadership skills and organizational capabilities from those that helped them succeed in the past at all levels of the firm. But the leadership development industry is in a state of upheaval. The number of players offering courses to impart the hard and soft skills required of corporate managers has expanded well beyond the traditional business schools, corporate universities, and dedicated consultancies. And yet organizations that spend billions of dollars annually to train current and future executives are growing frustrated with the results. There are three main reasons for the disjointed state of leadership development. The first is a gap in motivations. In executive development, the “customer” is not the “client.” The organization pays for the individual to enhance his or her skills—and résumé—and thereby benefit from participating. The second is the gap between the skills that executive development programs build and the skills that organizations require—particularly the interpersonal skills essential to thriving in today’s flat, networked, increasingly collaborative organizations. The third reason is the skills transfer gap. Simply put, most executives do not seem to take what they learn in the classroom and apply it to their jobs. For organizations to develop essential leadership and managerial talent, they will need to bridge these three gaps. The good news is that the growing assortment of online courses, social and interactive platforms, and learning tools from both traditional institutions and upstarts—which we call the personal learning cloud (PLC)—offers a solution. Organizations can select components from the PLC and tailor them to the needs and behaviors of individuals and teams. The PLC is flexible and immediately accessible, and it enables employees to pick up skills in the context in which they must be used. In effect, it’s a 21st-century form of on-the-job learning.

Keywords: talent management; executive education; Leadership Development; Business Education; Management Skills; Learning; Online Technology;

Citation:

Narayandas, Das, and Mihnea Moldoveanu. "The Future of Leadership Development." Harvard Business Review 97, no. 4 (March–April 2019): 40–48. (Spotlight Talent Management.) View Details

Cite View Details Find at Harvard

Faculty & Research

‘Organizing’, ‘Innovating’ and ‘Managing’ in Complexity Space

Abstract

Citation:

More from these Authors