A board's journey into complexity science: Lessons from (and for) staff and board members

Complexity science has been used as a lens to interpret organizations (Gold stein 1994; Morgan 1993, 1997; Stacey 1992, 1996a; Wheatley 1992; Wheatley and Kellner-Rogers 1996; Zimmerman 1993a, 1993b). These interpretations hav e shone a light on aspects of organizations that were idiosyncratic or at l east difficult to reconcile with dominant organizational theories. In this paper, we go beyond interpreting results through a complexity lens to demon strating how board members and staff of an organization deliberately applie d insights from complexity science to improve their work. Using an action l earning approach, we worked with the board and staff for a year. One of the lessons from this journey was the need to differentiate between "fake" com plexity and real complexity. Using "fake" complexity, simple issues were co mplexified and complex issues were avoided. Another key lesson was the role of relationships for complex issues. This paper presents a "STAR" relation ship model to help organizations discern the generative potential of curren t and future relationships. Each point, or letter, of the STAR represents o ne dimension of a potentially generative relationship. Through the action r esearch process, both the researchers and the members of the organization e xtended our understanding of how complexity science can enhance the capacit y to evolve in a rapidly changing environment.