25TH ANNIVERSARY VOLUME

A FAUSTIAN EXCHANGE: WHAT IS IT TO BE HUMAN IN THE ERA OF UBIQUITOUS TECHNOLOGY?

The dynamics of culture, innovation and organisationalchange: a nano-psychology future perspective of the psycho-socialand cultural underpinnings of innovation and technology

Eunice McCarthy

Received: 19 June 2013 / Accepted: 9 September 2013 / Published online: 29 November 2013

� Springer-Verlag London 2013

Abstract This article addresses salient conceptual issues

in social organisational psychology in probing change in

organisational systems, e.g., culture, innovation and

implementation, reflective practice and change models.

Insights from chaos–complexity research in the natural

sciences which underpin the dynamics of flux and change

to unravel the hidden, the unexplained, the disordered will

be built on to explore the phenomena of change from a

social psychological perspective. The concept of nano-

psychology is introduced to open up a creative debate in

the social psychological field on creative change which

builds on the nano-insights evolving in the natural science

field.

Keywords Organisational cultures � Contextual

complexity � Innovation and change �Nano-psychology � Hidden dynamics of systems

1 The dynamics of culture

This article explores complex relationships between soci-

etal cultures, organisational cultures and human behaviour

with a special focus on change and innovation and their

impact on hidden human psycho-social cognitive

dimensions.

Diversity has become one of the most important ideas of

research in psychology, sociology, cross-cultural psychol-

ogy and anthropology.

Six fundamental assumptions and research strategies

that are shared in the indigenous psychologies approach

and that are pertinent to our understanding of the dynamics

of culture include the following:

• Understanding is rooted in ecological context;

• Affirm the need for each culture to develop its own

indigenous understanding;

• Within a particular society, a multitude of perspectives

not shared by all groups: societies can embrace both

‘traditional’ and ‘modern/westernised’ sectors;

• Acceptance of the indigenous psychologies approach

does not affirm or preclude the use of a particular

method;

• Cross-indigenous comparisons may serve as mirrors

for understanding one’s own culture (Kleinman

1980);

• Indigenous psychologies approach does not assume a

priori the existence of psychological universals, but it

does seek as one of its goals the discovery of

universal facts, principles and laws. This approach

advocates the use of cross-cultural (Berry and Kim

1993) and cross-indigenous investigations (Enriquez

1993).

The unifying interest of anthropology as a whole is in

the transmission of social culture (institutions and ritual),

material culture (artefacts and skills) and mental culture

(mentifacts and conventions) from one generation to

another (see Posner 1989, Fig. 1). The mechanisms of

transmission are known as ‘tradition’ (e.g. Lotman et al.

1975; Mead 1912).

The division of anthropology into the three branches

outlined here undergirds the question of how social,

material and mental cultures are transmitted from one

generation to the next.

E. McCarthy (&)

Social and Organisational Psychology Research Centre, School

of Psychology, University College Dublin (UCD), Dublin 4,

Ireland

e-mail: eunice.mccarthy@ucd.ie

123

AI & Soc (2013) 28:471–482

DOI 10.1007/s00146-013-0512-9

The importance of implicit as well as explicit culture

was highlighted by Herskovitz (1955, p. 153) who states

that:

Culture may be thought of a kind of psychological

iceberg of whose totality only but a small proportion

appears above the level of consciousness.

Culture can thus be viewed as represented in (though never

identical with) the cognitive maps, motivations, perceptual

structuring, affective controls and ego defences of

individuals.

The tendency to study cultural influences as they act on

the individual was the focus of Triandis’s (1972) work on

subjective culture—The Analysis of Subjective Culture. For

Triandis, the subjective culture of each individual is

strongly influenced by the degree of contact she/he has

with people and institutions that see the world in terms of

their own sub-cultural perspectives or stories. How stories

constitute subjective culture is further teased out by

Howard (1991). For example, narrative or story-telling

psychologists such as Mair (1988, p. 127) observe:

Stories are habitations, we live in and through sto-

ries…We are lived by the stories of our race and

place. It is this enveloping and constituting function

of stories that is especially important to sense more

fully. We are, each of us, locations where the stories

of our place and time become partially tellable.

A cultural syndrome is a pattern of beliefs, attitudes, self-

definitions, norms and values that are organised around some

theme that can be identified in a society (Triandis 1994).

Four core cultural syndromes which have been isolated

by Triandis (1994) and which resonate with core charac-

teristics of organisational culture include:

• Complexity: Some cultures are more complex than

others.

• Individualism: Some cultures structure social experi-

ence around autonomous individuals.

• Collectivism: Some cultures organise their subjective

cultures around one, or more collectives, such as the

family, the tribe, the religious group or the country.

• Tightness: Some cultures impose many norms, rules

and constraints on social behaviour, while others are

rather loose in imposing such constraints.

The systemic and integrated nature of culture as high-

lighted by Mead (1954) draws our attention to central

characteristics of culture such as: the patterned quality of

culture; the degree of integration present in a culture

(tightly coupled systems or loosely coupled systems); the

interdependence between culture and technology and the

relationship between mind, culture and technology (see

also McCarthy 1996).

The cultural anthropologist Geertz (1973) speaks of

culture as a ‘pattern of meanings’ passed down over time.

We can identify two types of meaning: simple and complex.

When we talk about signs and what they stand for, we refer

to simple meanings which denote one-to-one correspon-

dence. Culture is viewed as complex and as such made up of

complex meanings which are embodied in symbols (Geertz

1973). To understand culture, we need to be able to unravel

the tangled webs of complex meanings. The psychology of

culture looks for psycho-social-cultural meanings.

Another well-known anthropologist, Edward J. Hall, has

spent more than 40 years developing a similar dimensional

classification system (Hall and Hall 1990). These authors

basically focus on the communicative patterns found

within cultures and emphasise four dimensions along

which societies can be compared. These include, context,

space, time and information flow.

• Context, or the amount of information that must be

explicitly stated if a message or communication is to be

successful.

• Space, or the ways of communicating through specific

handling of personal space, e.g., North Americans tend

to keep more space between them while communicat-

ing than do South Americans.

• Time, which is either monochronic (scheduling and

completing one activity at a time) or polychronic (not

distinguishing between activities and completing them

simultaneously).

• Information flow, which is the structure and speed of

messages between individuals or organisations.

Hall and Hall (1990) furthermore go on to array socie-

ties along an overarching high-context and low-context

dimension. In high-context societies, there is a heavy

investment in socialising members so that information does

not need to be explicitly stated to be understood (e.g. Japan

Material Culture

Social Mental Culture Culture

Fig. 1 Tripartite classification of culture in the field of anthropology

472 AI & Soc (2013) 28:471–482

123

and Arab countries). The low-context society categorisa-

tion would include the USA and Germany. In low-context

societies, information about rules and permissible behav-

iour are explicitly stated.

Hofstede (1984), in his comprehensive analysis of

national culture, taps the interface between national cultures

and organisational culture. He defines culture as the collec-

tive mental programming of the people of an environment.

Culture in this sense is viewed as existing in the minds

of the people in a society or nation, as well as being

crystallised in the institutions people have built: their

family structures, educational structures, religious organi-

sations, work organisations, forms of government, law and

literature. All of these reflect common beliefs that derive

from the common culture. Figure 2 graphically presents

three levels of uniqueness in mental programmes isolated

by Hofstede (1984).

Hofstede (1984) has been involved in extensive research

projects stretching over two decades on national culture.

He isolated empirical profiles for 40 countries across four

criteria which he labelled dimensions of basic cultural

values. These four dimensions are:

• Power distance

• Uncertainty avoidance

• Individualism–collectivism and

• Masculinity–femininity

Hofstede clearly differentiated between characteristics

of a national culture and characteristics of the individual

(personality). Characterising a national culture does not

mean that every person in the nation has all the charac-

teristics ascribed to a culture. National cultures refer to the

common elements or norms within each nation; these do

not describe individuals.

The cultural metaphor adopted by culture researcher

Gannon (1994) to describe Ireland is Irish Conversations.

Referring to the power of the conversation in Irish cul-

ture Gannon (1994, p. 189) observes:

Conversations with the Irish are known to take

strange turns, and one may end up discussing a sub-

ject and not knowing how it arose … it is not only

what is said that is important, but also the manner in

which it is expressed … (Ireland) is a ‘being ori-

ented’ society in which the quality of life is given

precedence over material rewards.

2 Culture and organisations

Organisations operate within and across cultures, and they

also generate cultures of their own. Organisational mem-

bers (managers and workers) create and receive shared

meanings embodied in forms that may facilitate or obstruct

the organisation’s activities. We can think of this exchange

of meanings as operating at three levels: the micro indi-

vidual or small-group level, the level of the large group

(e.g. managers; women workers) and at the overall

organisational level (Griswold 1994).

The cross-cultural programme of Hofstede (1984) has

channelled interest in the consequences of national culture

for organisational culture and has also focused attention on

relationships between societal culture, organisational cul-

ture and organisational effectiveness.

Since the 1980s in particular, the concept of organisa-

tional culture burst into the organisational behaviour and

organisational change landscape and was expected to

resolve or clarify a multitude of fundamental problems and

issues (Bete 1990).

The organisational culture research was built on the find-

ings of the early organisational climate research and sought

further to penetrate the deeper values, norms, assumptions and

language embedded in an organisational system.

The concept of organisational culture has at its root a

system of core values and beliefs about people and work

which are shared and are hypothesised to guide and shape

managerial and organisational behaviour. The concept of

organisational climate also taps into core beliefs and norms

and thus both constructs can be understood as sharing an

overlapping common ground comprising central beliefs

and values.

While there is no consensus on the definitions of

organisational culture in use, most authors would probably

agree on the following characteristics of the organisational

culture construct:

• It is holistic,

• Historically determined,

• Relating to anthropological concepts,

Fig. 2 Three levels of uniqueness in human mental programming

(Hofstede 1984)

AI & Soc (2013) 28:471–482 473

123

• Socially constructed,

• Soft, and

• Difficult to change.

According to Schein (1990), a given set of people have

to have enough stability and common history to allow a

culture to form. This means that some organisations will

have no overarching culture because they have no common

history or have frequent turnover of members. On the other

hand, other organisations can be presumed to have ‘strong’

cultures because they have a long shared history (e.g. a

religious community) or because they have shared impor-

tant intense experience (as in a combat unit).

3 Levels of organisational culture

In his comprehensive analysis of organisational culture,

Schein (1990) proposes a useful three level framework

which can be adopted in analysing the culture of a partic-

ular group or organisation. The three fundamental levels at

which organisational culture manifests itself are as follows:

• Observable artefacts,

• Values and

• Basic underlying assumptions.

Language in the form of stories, myths, metaphors and

legends is one of the most important aspects of culture.

Language is linked to ‘deeper’ layers of organisational

culture acting as both an indicator of cultural essence and

also as an agent of transfer (Hofstede 1991).

The model developed by Harrison and Stokes (1992)

who conceptualise organisational culture along four core

dimensions has influenced organisational thinking and

practice over 20 years. In essence, they sought to explore

how people treat one another, what values they live by,

how people are motivated to produce and how people use

power in the organisation. They argue that each organisa-

tion has four basic organisational cultures/subcultures.

These include the following

• Power-oriented culture,

• Role culture,

• Achievement culture and

• Support and person-oriented culture.

These theorists proposed that each subculture evokes

different behaviours and is based on different human val-

ues. The core values and characteristics embedded in each

subculture are delineated as follows:

Power-oriented culture is based on inequality of access

to resources. It rests on the acceptance of hierarchy and

inequality as legitimate by all members of the organisation.

Harrison and Stokes (1992) argue that when power-ori-

ented organisations expand, they often run short of lead-

ership talent because followers have been conditioned to be

dependent.

The role orientation the values of the role culture are

order, dependability, rationality and consistency. It consists

of a system of structure and procedures. The role culture is

best suited to the stable combination of technology, for

supplies and markets. This system which is also high on

control, keeps people from being innovative and takes a

long time to make needed changes.

The achievement orientation while extensive rewards and

punishments are adopted to motivate people, the achieve-

ment culture assumes that people like their work and want

to make a worthwhile contribution both to their work and

to society. The work context is designed to provide

intrinsic satisfaction such as recognition, ongoing chal-

lenge and learning and evoke personal commitment and

engagement of a higher order.

3.1 The support organisation

The support culture may be defined as an organisational

culture that is based on mutual trust between the individual

and the organisation.

In such an organisation, people believe that they are

valued human beings. People like their work and the

people they work with—they feel cared for and people

trust, respect and value each other. Organisational change

and development initiatives have implications for support-

oriented organisations. These include, in particular, a

focus on quality and service (see also Lewin 1947).

Teams and circles dedicated to quality develop close ties

with those whom they work. Harrison (1987, p. 15)

relates his experience with the Irish airline Aer Lingus

and the cabin attendants as radiating warmth. For Harri-

son, the qualities of the Irish cabin attendants were not so

much a matter of training as the style of the Irish National

Culture.

4 Culture and organisational change and effectiveness

The assumption underlying organisational culture is that it

can have a profound impact on the effectiveness of the

organisation. Researchers contend that organisational cul-

ture influences the most important issues in organisation

life: how decisions are made, how human resources are

used and how people respond to the environment. If

organisational culture pervades our beliefs, values and

behaviour, then it will govern the decision-making and

474 AI & Soc (2013) 28:471–482

123

problem-solving processes of the organisation. It will

influence the goals, means and manner of action.

In order to understand the process of organisational

change and resistance to change, it is crucial for the

organisation to understand the meaning of culture, how

culture evolves, is learned and how it manifests itself.

Further, as suggested by Pettigrew (1979) given that

leaders are creators of culture, a change in leadership may

also provide opportunities for culture change. It should be

recognised, however, as cautioned by Schein (1990) that

attempting to create behaviour change of members without

culture change may not work at all, or may work at a high

cost to the organisation.

Those with lesser status and power are excluded. When

organisations encounter serious trouble, those included in

the mythology find it hard to break out of the stereotypical

thinking that belief in the mythology encourages. Shaping

the relationship between organisational culture and effec-

tiveness requires understandings and skills to uncover the

hidden cultural assumptions, myths and taboos that cloud

thinking and complicate actions (Zaleznik 1989).

Another perspective which views the world as being in a

state of constant movement, change and growth is that of

chaos theory (Gleick 1987). Looking at organisational

culture and change through the lens of organisational chaos

and the implicate order offers a framework with which to

encounter the hidden, the uncertain, the unexpected and the

creative in cultural system (McCarthy 1993).

A creative approach to culture allows a reframing and

refocusing of the way in which we view organisational

reality. It guides the organisation towards an encounter

with itself—a self—organisational mirroring. Where

organisational change fails to deal with organisational

anxiety, uncertainty and culture’s deeper layers of which

members are not immediately aware, the resultant outcome

can merely aggravate the experienced situations requiring

change and generate new anxieties and aggression. From a

psycho-analytic perspective, Eric Trist observed that the

‘internal saboteur’ often unconsciously undermines what is

attempted at the conscious level (Trist 1989).

To sum up, culture as a collective organisational mem-

ory provides a metaphor which encapsulates the experi-

ences of our organisational predecessors (ancestors). It is a

collective cauldron which stores and forges meaning and

information. Culture change taps into the deep complexity

of an organisation—there is a need for a recognition of the

flux and flow of change on the part of all the organisation’s

members and an understanding of how these changes can

be encouraged by leadership. Understandings of the need to

tap hidden repressed parts of the organisational system in a

manner that celebrates the complexity of the cultural

domain have yet to unfold in a meaningful sense in our

global contexts and environments.

5 The challenge of innovation

In today’s changing work environments, innovation is

important. Innovation researchers speak of innovation as a

product or practice that is new for its developers and/or for

its potential users.

Innovation adoption is the decision to use an innovation.

In contrast, innovation implementation is the transition

period during which individuals become increasingly

skilful, consistent and committed to their use of the inno-

vation (Klein and Sorra 1996, p. 1957).

The difference between adoption and implementation is

fundamental. As pointed out by Klein and Knight (2005)

individuals, teams, organisations and communities often

adopt innovations but fail to implement them successfully.

The ineffectiveness of the implementation process reflects

not the ineffectiveness of the innovation per se. Some core

stumbling blocks to innovation implementation can be

isolated as follows: (Klein and Knight 2005).

• Many innovations, particularly technological innova-

tions, are unreliable and imperfectly designed. Klein

and Rolls (1995) in their review reported that 61 % of

the qualitative studies documented negative conse-

quences of low technology quality and availability on

employee satisfaction and innovation use.

• Innovation complexity—the extent to which the new

technology was more complicated than the technology

it replaced—was further significantly negatively related

to user satisfaction and the speed required to become

competent in using the innovation.

• It was further noted that given that the decision to adopt

and implement an innovation is typically made by

leaders, managers higher in the hierarchy than the

innovation targeted users, and given that users often

have great comfort in the status quo and may have

scepticism regarding the merits of the innovation given

that the management guide the implementation process

by ‘persuasion’ and ‘edict’. Further that managers

engaged in little or no user input in decisions regarding

the adoption and implementation is typical (see also

Nutt 1976).

• Many team and organisational innovations also require

individuals to change their roles, routines and norms.

For example, innovation implementation may require

individuals who have previously worked quite inde-

pendently to coordinate their activities and share

information: doctors may be required to step out of

their solely expert roles and interact with their patients

as facilitators.

• Innovation implementation is also time-consuming,

expensive and often requires heavy investments of

time and finance in technology start-up, training,

AI & Soc (2013) 28:471–482 475

123

user support, monitoring, meetings and evaluation.

Thus, in the short run, even the most beneficial

innovation is likely to result in poorer team and/or

organisations performance (see Repenning and Ster-

man 2002).

• Organisations and their cultures are a stabilising force.

Even when organisational members recognise that a

specific change would be beneficial, they still cling to

the status quo, to the past, and may substitute talk for

action.

Given the challenges to implementation success, it

comes as no surprise that observers/researchers estimate

that nearly 50 % of attempts to implement major techno-

logical and administration changes end in failure (Baer and

Frese 2003; Klein et al. 2001).

6 Innovation and reflective practice

Where an organisation has built up insights on ‘Reflective

Practice’, the blocks and barriers to innovation imple-

mentation can be isolated, while the supports and positive

initiatives can further be identified and built on.

6.1 Reflective practice

Reflective openness starts with the willingness to challenge

our thinking and our ideas.

Reflective Practice draws our attention first to Mental

Models: those are deeply engrained assumptions, general-

isations or even pictures and images that influence how we

understand the world and how we take action.

Often we are not consciously aware of our mental

models or the effects they have on our behaviour. Many

insights into new markets fail to get put into practice

because they conflict with powerful and tacit mental

models. Reflective practice can fruitfully draw on the five

disciplines of the Learning Organisation (see Senge 1979,

‘The Fifth Discipline’).

These include

• Mental Models—Developing capacity to reflect on our

internal pictures of the world to see how they shape our

actions.

• Resource Mastery—Developing capacity to clarify

what is most important to us and to achieve it.

• Building shared ‘vision’—Building a sense of commit-

ment in a group based on what people want to create.

• Team Learning—Developing capacity for collective

intelligence.

• Systems Thinking—Developing capacity for putting

pieces together and seeing wholes.

Systems Thinking integrates the four disciplines—

building and reinforcing feedback. Donald Schon in his

book ‘The Reflective Practitioner’ (1983) identifies the

essential principles of practice and our own experience in a

virtual world.

In organisations, a Philosophy of ‘participative man-

agement’ involving people more in decision-making is

widely espoused. While people may appear to be contrib-

uting in an open way, yet people may not feel safe sharing

their views. While ‘participative management’ leads to

people speaking out, ‘reflective openness’ involves people

looking inwards. It starts with a willingness to challenge

one’s own thinking—it involves not only examining one’s

own ideas but mutually examining others thinking. It is

based on skills—the skills of reflection and inquiry. Those

involve distinguishing ‘Espoused Theory’ from ‘Theory in

use’ and to become more aware of and responsible for what

we are thinking and not saying. They are also the skills of

dialogues and dealing with defensive routines—tapped in

team learning.

6.1.1 Organisational contexts

It is now recognised that organisational learning relating

both processes of the system and contents of action,

behaviours, is critical for deeper understanding of the

system dynamics. Argyris (1990) points out core elements

as follows:

• Focussing clients on exploring process options—the

process of change, communication, observing underly-

ing dynamics.

• Mirroring back and challenging ongoing culture that

blocks communication, understanding and listening.

• Reflection learning at the organisational level, working

with feedback, knowledge of performance contribu-

tions, past barriers and system change.

• Work—life balance issues, family-friendly policies and

practices.

Reflective Practice can further be fruitfully examined at

three levels of analysis: individual, group-teams and

organisation.

6.1.2 Individual level

One-on-one meeting of leader/coach with clients and

establishing clients’ perceptions of

• Own competencies, abilities, strengths,

• Core work demands and expectations regarding

proficiency,

• Stressors experienced and coping strategies adopted.

476 AI & Soc (2013) 28:471–482

123

Perceptions of effectiveness of coping researches and

support in plans following from successes experienced and

perceptions of barriers to satisfactory achievement.

Extent to which client reflects on these interrelated

issues, the role of co-workers in shaping the achievement

and the organisational system at critical levels.

6.1.3 Group: team level

• Group perceptions of the group work-team dynamic,

the client is embedded in.

• Perception of salient group-team issues that impede

individual and group-team satisfaction, performance on

group morale.

• Level of communication and support emanating from

the group—team.

• Level of openness and focus on critical issues impact-

ing on performance-linking forces supporting satisfac-

tion achievement.

• Extent of open reflection on the issues central to the

group and teams regarding areas not focused on.

• Change in group process that would enable one to make

constructive contributions.

6.1.4 The organisational level

• Awareness of difficulties and barriers to reflection at

individual, group and organisational levels.

• The centrality of organisational reflection and organi-

sational learning (learning built on reflection).

• The need to create a culture for reflection

• Support of open analysis

• Reward system for highlighting blocks and barriers

to growth

• Facilitating group reflection

‘I am still learning’ – Michelanglo (1475–1564)

7 The dynamics of change

In recent years, the positive paradigm (of science and the

scientific method approaches) has come under major crit-

icism especially from the philosophy of science, the natural

sciences and human and social sciences (e.g. Bohm 1980;

Harre 1981, Schwartz and Ogilvy 1979).

Lincoln and Guba (1985) in their seminal book Natu-

ralistic Inquiry sum up the nature of the challenges by

focussing on the following assertions:

• Positivism falls short of being able to deal with

emergent conceptual/empirical formulations from a

variety of field, e.g., Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle

in physics (Heisenberg 1971) and subjectivity in

feminist research (Hollway 1989).

• Positivism has produced research with human respon-

dents that ignores their humanness (Lincoln and Guba

1985, p. 25–28).

Over the past three decades, the debate has been

building up around the question, what is a new post-posi-

tive paradigm?

Lincoln and Guba (1985 p. 37) draw together core issues

that impact on theory and research not only in psychology

but also in the other social sciences and the natural sci-

ences. These can be summarised as follows:

The nature of reality—is viewed as multiple, con-

structed and intrinsic;

The relationship between the knower and the known is

interactive and inseparable;

With reference to the possibility of generalisation—only

time—context-bound working hypotheses (idiographic

statements) are possible;

The possibility of causal linkages sees all entities in a

state of multiple, simultaneous shaping, so that it is

impossible to distinguish causes from effects.

• Inquiry is viewed as value-bound rather than value-free.

Naturalistic inquiry, grounded on the naturalistic para-

digm, offers a post-positive approach for working with

system and organisational change.

Since the 1950s, social–organisational psychology

draws on a Systems Model which introduced psycho-

social dimensions into the emergent models for

encountering understanding and working with/within

organisations.

Systems theory as applied to organisations introduced

biological models to organisational theory. The metaphor

of organisation as organism began to take root.

7.1 Chaos complexity and change

As we have seen, separate streams of inquiry by leading

edge scientists in the natural sciences went beyond the

positivist paradigm and proposed new questions, new

methodologies and new interpretations. Their exploration

tapped into core issues such as:

• Is science objective or subjective or both?

• Is the observer the observed? (Bohm 1980)

• Can all properties of a system be known exactly?

(Heisenberg 1958)

• Do microstructures and macrostructures evolve

together? (Jantsch 1980)

• Are we part of a self-organising universe (Jantsch

1980).

AI & Soc (2013) 28:471–482 477

123

It is now becoming clear that those questions which

grew out of dilemmas and paradoxes faced primarily by

physicists, chemists and biologists are also of paramount

significance for probing the human and social dilemmas

and paradoxes faced by people as they live out their lives

in family, work and organisational domains. One theme

central to all disciplines is the phenomenon of change.

Bohm (1980) has developed a theory that seeks to

understand the universe as a flowing and unbroken

wholeness. He views flux and change as fundamental,

arguing that the state of the universe at any point in time

reflects a more basic reality. He calls this the implicate

(or unfolded) order manifested in the world around us.

The implicate order is viewed as a creative process, which

like a hologram has everything enfolded in everything

else (see Morgan 1986). For Bohm, the world unfolds and

enfolds from moment to moment. This process creates the

appearance of continuity in the midst of change. Bohm’s

theory encourages us to see the world itself but as a

moment in the fundamental process of change, rather than

seeing change as an attribute of reality. The implicate

order proposed by Bohm as the dynamic underlying the

flux of change is analogous to the unconscious in the

theories of Freud (1938) and Jung (1963). At the level of

the organisation, it resonates with the concept of culture

which can be understood as the carrier of shared mean-

ings, shared understandings and shared sense making in

the organisational setting (Schein 1990). Weick (1979)

speaks of the proactive role that we unconsciously play in

creating our organisational models as a process of

enactment. In modern organisations, which are ever fre-

quently described as complex systems in turbulent envi-

ronments, the search for new frameworks, with which to

encounter the hidden, the uncertain, the unexpected, the

disordered, is ever pressing. It is proposed here that newly

emerging concepts, metaphors and insights derived from

the evolving field of chaos research can open up a crea-

tive debate for those psychologists who are seeking to

understand, inquire into and become part of the process

and dynamics of organisational change.

7.2 Chaos: the beginnings

In the 1970s, a few scientists in the natural sciences in

the USA and in Europe began to direct their gaze more

towards the baffling phenomenon of disorder. They

searched for connections between different kinds of

irregularity. Since chaos theory is challenging the most

enduring assumptions in a wide range of disciplines, it is

‘both exhilarating and a bit threatening’ (Gleick 1987,

p. 315).

It is becoming further evident now that the scientists

who set the description of chaos in motion showed certain

sensibility in the following ways:

• They had an eye for patterns, especially patterns that

appeared on different scales, at the same time.

• They had a taste for randomness and complexity, for

jagged edges and sudden leaps.

• They speculated about determinism and free will,

evolution and the nature of conscious intelligence.

• They spoke about the universal behaviour of

complexity.

• They feel they are turning back the reductionist trend in

the natural sciences—the analysis of systems in terms

of their constituent parts.

• They believe they are working for the whole (see

Gleick 1987).

7.3 Chaos and organisational change

The lead that chaos theorists within the domain of natural

science are giving in integrating chaos as a fact of life

provides a strong impetus for researchers in the human and

social sciences to see chaos as belonging to our world

picture. Natural science has come to see the world as being

in a state of constant movement, change and growth.

Nothing is static and stable. Within such a universe, chaos

plays a major role. Chaos and order are no longer to be

viewed as mutually exclusive. They can and do exist in the

life process of natural organisms. Of fundamental interest

is their applicability to humanity.

The tenet that there is order in chaos pushes us towards a

multi-perspective in looking at human phenomena in

organisational systems. The problem is to find the proper

perspective to be able to perceive the order in chaos.

Prigogine and Stengers (1984), in their demanding book

‘Order Out of Chaos’ point out that our vision of nature is

undergoing radical change, towards the multiple, the tem-

poral and the complex. ‘Dissipative Structure’ is a concept

which refers to new structure which emerges out of a

simple structure. They argue that order and organisation

can arise spontaneously out of disorder and chaos, through

a process of self-organisation.

Chaos–complexity concepts, central to understanding

probing human systems and organisational change, include

the following:

1. Nonlinearity

2. The butterfly effect

3. Discontinuity

4. Sensitive and flexibility

5. Synergetics

478 AI & Soc (2013) 28:471–482

123

7.3.1 Nonlinearity

Prigogine and Stengers (1984) refer to nonlinear systems in

which change takes place in a nonlinear fashion. Their sum

is more than the total of their parts. In such systems, simple

laws of cause and effect do not suffice to explain the

changes one observes—complicated feedback systems are

all at play.

7.3.2 The butterfly effect

According to this principle, tiny differences in input could

quickly become overwhelming differences in output—

called sensitive dependence on initial conditions. The

Butterfly Effect captures this phenomenon; the notion that

a butterfly stirring the air today in Peking can transform

storm systems next month in Dublin

7.3.3 Discontinuity

Discontinuity phenomena have had no place in the geom-

etry of the past 2000? years. Classical geometry shapes

are characters as linear, lines, circles, triangles, etc. rep-

resenting platonic harmony. In understanding complexity,

these turn out to be the wrong kind of abstraction. The new

geometry mirrors a universe that is rough, twisted, tangled

and intertwined. Mandelbrot’s (1982) work made a claim

that odd shapes carry meaning.

7.3.4 Sensitivity and flexibility

Chaos research suggests that both order and chaos are two

aspects of living and experience that have to be

accommodated.

Gleick (1987) asks why there are forms in nature—not

visible forms, but shapes embedded in the fabric of

motions—waiting to be revealed.

Synergetics phenomenon of self-organisation whereby

systems pass from one stage of order through a chaotic or

disorder phase to arrive at a new and more complex state of

order is central to self-organisation.

The Jungian analyst Burston (1992) contends that chaos

is the starting point of nano-psychoanalysis. Freud, since

the early 1900s, saw his major mission as the unravelling of

the secrets of the unconscious—the region of psychic chaos

and complexity.

Biologists such as Maturana and Varela (1980) have

pointed out that natural organisms are uniquely sensitive in

their milieu. In other words, they are in a continual process

of adapting and re-adapting to their outer and inner worlds.

Flexibility is viewed as the key to survival in an ever

changing environment.

An understanding of organisational change from the

perspective of chaos research draws one into the hidden

recesses of systems and allows one to embrace uncertainty,

recursiveness and diversity. While Prigogine and Stengers

(1984) and Gleick (1987) carefully chart ways of seeking

order in chaos, it also behoves researchers who are working

with systems that appear ordered, to seek ‘chaos in order’

and to work with chaos towards revealing creative organ-

isational change.

There is order in disorder, a pattern in the chaos.

If only we could find it, there is meaning somewhere.

7.3.5 Organisational iceberg

The organisational iceberg, which maps (a) the formal

(overt) aspects of organisations and b) the informal (covert)

aspects which draw clear attention to the information

domains. Core elements here which include beliefs, per-

ceptions, attitudes, feelings, values, norms, etc. are typi-

cally the hidden aspect of organisation contexts which have

been misunderstood, ignored and not embraced in critical

decision-making and planning implementation of change

initiatives (see Fig. 3).

7.4 The invisible/hidden system

I wish to introduce a concept which is now familiar in

different branches of natural sciences—physics and

chemistry, e.g., nano-technology.

The hidden, covert aspects of the organisational systems

tap the hidden and misunderstood aspects of organisational

functioning.

It is now timely into the future to consider in depth the

strengths and the impact of the hidden on organisational

decision-making at all levels—judgement and implementa-

tion. A concept not yet focused on in the psychological

domain which would underpin deep insights is proposed here

as a core factor to explore and track. This construct is labelled

Nano-Psychology by McCarthy and Tiernan (2013).

7.4.1 Nano-psychology

Nano refers to the small, microscopic, subatomic field.

Do we have constructs for exploring and explaining

behaviours that make sense within the psycho-social

human domain? McCarthy and Tiernan (2012–2013) have

been exploring the potential of ‘Nano-Psychology’ for

probing the hidden and the invisible in psychology and its

power in shaping behaviour, thinking, feelings, decision-

making and judgement—change. This is a new challenging

domain. Constructs that make sense at the nano-level

include the following:

AI & Soc (2013) 28:471–482 479

123

• The issue of ‘intuition’ which psychologists have

presumed is based on registering minute details of

events obtained through sensory information that

cannot be articulated as verbal constructs—‘the feeling

of being watched’, for example, or ‘the hairs raising on

the back of my neck’ denote fear which cannot be

verbalised. Intuition taps into the unknown knowing,

implicit and explicit understanding and knowledge

Nano-Cognition.

• Emotional and social intelligence

The concepts of Emotional Intelligence (EI) as well as

Social Intelligence (SI) developed by Goleman (2006) in

recent years have mapped transformational levels of

behaviour, e.g., self-awareness ‘Gut Sense’ and social

awareness (empathy, sensing others’ emotions), under-

pinning decisions, performance and innovation behaviour.

• There is also the issue of Non-Verbal Behaviour (NVB)

accepted as a source of information that again cannot

be easily quantified but is presumed to be based on

particular attunements of the senses to data that has

survival significance for humans, that is, psycho-social-

emotional information which enables us to adapt

quickly (effectively and appropriately) to social situa-

tions in which we find ourselves (see also Tiernan

1994). This dynamic flow at the nano-level-tuning in

with support, help, love, communion and culture can be

further viewed as Nano-Interaction.

• There is further the issue of the unconscious used to

explain urgings which leak into conscious thought or

action as needs, motives, goals and drives, e.g., Jung,

Freud. The flow of consciousness at the nano-level can

be described as Nano-Selves.

All of these are invisible springs for behaviour. Almost

all of human behaviour is explained by recourse to the

invisible—feelings, beliefs, attitudes and the uncon-

scious—and through the workings of neurotransmitters in a

brain whose terrain has yet to be precisely mapped.

The question arises what could we hope to explain

through the ‘nano-psychology’ concept that is not

explainable at present? It could prove a useful foundation

for understanding plasticity and flexibility and change in

human behaviour in a way that is not possible using neuro-

cognitive constructs. It could also provide scope for

intervention at a level hitherto unimagined because plas-

ticity and flexibility at such a micro level would yield

possibilities for increasing self-regulation, more intense,

precise change experienced more quickly and delivering

specific, desired consequences.

The impact of the invisible over time can result in crisis

and chaos which can be both positive and negative. Given

advances in technological evolution and treading in the sea

of data (see Yonck 2011), various new challenges and

possibilities need to be faced.

The potential of artificial intelligence to surpass human

intelligence leads to questions which the psychologist/artist

asks:

• what traits do we value not only in machines but in

ourselves?

• Do we value intelligence over emotion?

• Analysis over empathy?

• Data over nuance (what does this mean for our

machines and what does it mean for ourselves)?

7.5 Challenges for the future

As machines become more life like, do people lose their

humanity and lose sight of the value of empathy and

A

B

Formal (Overt Aspects)Goals TechnologyStructure Policies and procedures

CONTEXTS Products

Financial resources

Informal (Covert) AspectsBeliefs and assumptions about

the Perceptions formal

and Attitudes

informal systemsFeelings, (Anger, fear, liking, despair,

etc. Values

Informal interactionsGroup norms

Norms

Fig. 3 Organisational iceberg

480 AI & Soc (2013) 28:471–482

123

emotion favouring more programming traits. Question

arises, what are the unanticipated consequences, what is

lost and what is gained?

Turtle (2011) in her recent book ‘Alone together, why

we expect more from technology and less from each other’

taps into today’s and future concerns of the relationship

between our own humanity and teaching robots to be

lifelike. She states that we are lonely but the human

empathy we crave has become too difficult. She argues that

people seek comfort by the belief that if we fail each other,

robots will be programmed to provide simulations of love.

Robots will become the ultimate care taker and companion

for the aged and for children.

Pringle (2013) noted that as technology and humanity

cannot be isolated into separate conversations, we must

continually re-examine our own humanity. The artist and

the storyteller have been doing that for centuries—they

speak of a need for visionary clarity and balances. A sen-

sitive focus on the nano-psychology levels challenges us to

explore, examine and seek understanding of the deeper

layers of our humanity to feel the empathy of our fellow

human beings and to love and be loved—the primary

source of joy and anguish in the human life.

The nano-construct may further alter what we under-

stand as ‘systems’ when applied to explain human expe-

rience and transformation—change. The process of

transformation is moving more and more of what is unseen

and unexamined in the way that we understand organisa-

tions and the world. Our unquestioned beliefs about the

world are held implicitly and those beliefs shape our

experience of the world and the possibilities we perceive.

The more profound example of a move from implicit to

explicit is when gradually over time entire meaning-mak-

ing systems move from being hidden to being seen, visible

and to reflect on (see also Berger and Atkins 2009).

Where is the wisdom,

That we have lost in knowledge

Where is the knowledge

We have lost in information

T.S. Eliot (The Rock 1936)

References

Argyris C (1990) Overcoming organizational defenses: facilitating

organizational learning. Allyn and Bacon, Boston

Baer M, Frese M (2003) Innovation is not enough: climates for

initiative and psychological safety, process innovations and firm

performance. J Organ Behav 24:45–68

Berger JG, Atkins PWB (2009) Mapping complexity of mind, using

the subject object interview in coaching. Int J Theory Res Pract

2:23–36

Berry JW, Kim U (1993) The way ahead: from indigenous

psychologies to a universal psychology. In: Kim U, Berry JW

(eds) Indigenous psychologies: research and experience in

cultural context. Sage Publications, London

Bete P (1990) Using the culture concept in an organisational

development setting. J Appl Behav Sci 26:83–106

Bohm D (1980) Wholeness and the implicate order. Routledge and

Kegan Paul, London

Burston D (1992) Erich Fromm und die Frankfurter Schule. In:

Kessler M, Funk R (eds) Akten des internationalen, interdiszi-

plinaren Symposions Stuttgart-Hohenheim vom 31. 5. bis 2. 6.

1991, Tubingen (Francke Verlag), pp 61–68

Eliot TS (1936) The rock. In: Eliot TS (ed) An anthology. Faber and

Faber, London

Enriquez F (1993) Latvian Limon un Ragana Kuka [Unknown

Binding], Peanut Butter Pub

Freud S (1938) The psychopathology of everyday life. In: Brill AA

(ed) The basic writings of Sigmund Freud. Random House, New

York, pp 33–178

Gannon MJ (1994) Understanding global cultures: metaphorical

journey through 17 countries. Sage Publications, Thousand

Oaks, CA

Geertz C (1973) The interpretation of culture. Basic Books, New

York

Gleick J (1987) Chaos: making a new science. Sphere Books Ltd.,

London

Goleman D (2006) Social intelligence in the new science of social

relatedness. Hutchinson, London

Griswold W (1994) Culture and societies in a changing world. Pine

Forge Press, London

Hall E, Hall M (1990) Understanding cultural difference. Interna-

tional Press, Yarmouth, ME

Harre R (1981) The positivist-empiricist approach and its alternative.

In: Reason Peter, Power John (eds) Human inquiry: a sourcebook

of new paradigm research. John Wiley, New York

Harrison JR (1987) The strategic use of organisational cultures.

California Manag Rev 30(1):109–125

Harrison R, Stokes H (1992) Diagnosing organisational culture.

Pfeiffer and Co., Amsterdam

Heisenberg W (1958) A physicist’s conception of nature. Hutchinson,

London

Heisenberg W (1971) Physics and beyond. Harper & Row, New York

Herskovitz MJ (1955) Cultural anthropology. Knopf, NY

Hofstede G (1984) Culture’s consequences: international differences

in work-related values. Sage Publications, Beverly Hills

Hofstede G (1991) Cultures and organisations: software of the mind.

McGraw-Hill, New York

Hollway W (1989) Subjectivity and method in psychology: gender

meaning and science. Sage Publications, London

Howard GS (1991) Culture tales: a narrative approach to thinking,

cross-cultural psychology and psychotherapy. Am Psychol

46:187–197

Jantsch E (1980) The self-organising universe: scientific and human

implications of the emerging paradigm of evolution. Pergamon

Press, Oxford

Jung CG (1963) Memories, dreams, reflections. Pantheon Press, New

York

Klein KJ, Knight AP (2005) Innovation implementation, overcoming

the challenge. APA Curr Dir Psychol Sci 114(5):243–246

Klein KJ, Sorra JS (1996) The challenge of innovation implemen-

tation. Acad Manag Rev 21:1055–1080

Klein KJ, Conn AB, Sorra JS (2001) Implementing computerized

technology: an organizational analysis. J Appl Psychol

86:811–824

Kleinman A (1980) Patients and healers in context of culture.

University of California Press, Berkeley

Lewin K (1947) Frontiers in group dynamics: channels of group life:

social planning and action research. Hum Relat 1:143–153

AI & Soc (2013) 28:471–482 481

123

Lincoln YS, Guba EG (1985) Naturalistic inquiry. Sage Publications,

California

Lotman YM, Uspensky BA, Ivanov VV, Toporov UN, Piatigorsky

AM (1975) Theses on the semiotic study of cultures (as Applied

to Slavic Texts)

Mair M (1988) Psychology as storytelling. Int J Pers Constr Psychol

1:125–138

Mandelbrot BB (1982) The fractal geometry of nature. W.H.

Freeman, New York

Maturana H, Varela F (1980) Autopoiesis and cognition: the

realization of the living. Reide, London

McCarthy E (1993) Chaos and organisational change. Thornfield J

16:25–32

McCarthy E (1996) Culture, mind, and technology: making a

difference. In: Gill KS (ed) Human machine symbiosis. Spinger,

London, pp 143–176

McCarthy E, Tiernan J (2013) Nano psychology: charting new

frameworks for the implicit, hidden, invisible in psychology

(research initiative). Social and Organisational Psychology

Research Centre, University College Dublin

Mead GH (1912) The mechanism of social consciousness. J Philos

9:401–406

Mead M (1954) Methods of research of contemporary cultures. Reissued

as understanding ourselves: theory and method in anthropologies of

contemporary western cultures. Berghahn Books, Spring 2004

Morgan G (1986) Images of organisations. Sage Publications Inc.,

London

Nutt PC (1976) Models for decision making in organizations and

some contextual variables which stipulate optimal use. Acad of

Manag Rev 1(2):84–98

Pettigrew AM (1979) On studying organisational cultures. Adminis-

trative science quarterly. Qual Methodol 24(4):570–581

Posner R (1989) Toward a semiotic explication of anthropological

concepts. In: Kock WA (ed) The nature of culture. Bochum,

Brockmeyer, pp 240–295

Prigogine I, Stengers J (1984) Order out of chaos. Heinemann,

London

Pringle R (2013) Life imitates art: cybords, cinema and future

scenarios. The Futurist, July–August 47(4):31–34

Repenning NP, Sterman JD (2002) Capability traps and self-

confirming attribution errors in the dynamics of process

improvement. Adm Sci Q 47:265–295

Schein EH (1990) Organisational culture. Am psychol 45(2):109–119

Schon D (1983) The reflective practitioner. Basic Books, New York

Schwartz P, Ogilvy J (1979) The emergent paradigm: changing

patterns of thought and belief. Analytical report 7 value and

lifestyles programme. RI International, Menlo Park, CA

Senge P (1979) The dance of change: the challenges to sustaining

momentum in a learning organization. Doubleday, New York

Tiernan J (1994) Social perception: towards an ecological approach.

Thornfield J 17:9–15

Triandis HC (1972) The analysis of subjective culture. Wiley-

Interscience, New York

Triandis H (1994) Culture and social behaviour. McGraw-Hill Co.,

New York

Trist EL (1989) Work improvement and organisational democracy.

In: Trist EL, Murray H (eds) The social engagement of social

science, vol 2. Tavistock Institute, London

Turkle S (2011) Alone together: why do we expect more from

technology and less from each other. Basic Books, New York

Weick K (1979) The social psychology of organising, 2nd edn.

Reading, Addison-Wesley, MA

Yonck R (2011) Treading in the sea of data. The Futurist, July–

August 45(4):32–36

Zaleznik A (1989) The managerial mystique: restoring leadership in

business. Harper & Row, New York

482 AI & Soc (2013) 28:471–482

123