Preferencje help
Widoczny [Schowaj] Abstrakt
Liczba wyników
2019 | nr 4 | 43--53
Tytuł artykułu

Towards Organisational Simplexity - a Simple Structure in a Complex Environment

Warianty tytułu
Języki publikacji
The article contributes to the discussion on the validity and ways of simplifying modern organisations. There is an increasing focus on simplifying organisations, especially their organisational structures. However, the environment of contemporary organisations is increasingly complex, dynamic and uncertain. Therefore, the postulate of simplicity seems to question Ashby's law stating that one kind of variety must be balanced by a different kind of variety. To cope with the indicated discrepancy, it is assumed that the simplification of some elements of an organisation is only possible due to the excessive complexity of others. The paper aims to verify the concept of organisational simplexity developed by e Cunha and Rego, which postulates the fit between simple structural solutions, complex workforce and complex environment. However, organisational performance is a factor verifying the legitimacy of the fit. The literature study explored the contradiction inherent in the postulate on the simplification of modern organisations. The contingency theory provided a major framework for the study. The research hypothesis was developed and empirically verified. The empirical study targeted 1142 organisations operating in Poland and Switzerland, different by their industry, size and the form of ownership. To verify the hypothesis, a statistical analysis was carried out, and the multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) method was used. The main result of the critical literature analysis is the finding that theoretical indications for simplifying modern organisations are fragmented, mainly focused on simplifying selected elements of an organisation, not considering the contradiction inherent in the postulate of simplicity related to environmental features and not verified empirically. The notion of the simplexity has been adopted, and it treats the simplicity and complexity as interrelated issues conditioned by situational factors. According to the empirical research results, the fit has been revealed between the degree of structure simplicity, the workforce complexity and the environment features. (original abstract)
Opis fizyczny
  • Wrocław University of Science and Technology, Poland
  • Wrocław University of Science and Technology, Poland
  • Wrocław University of Science and Technology, Poland
  • Ahmos, D.P., Duchon, D., McDaniel, R.R. Jr, & Huonker, J.W. (2002). What a Mess! Participation as a Simple Managerial Rule to 'Complexify' Organizations. Journal of Management Studies, 39(2), 189-206. doi: 10.1111/1467-6486.00288
  • Ashkenas, R. (2007). Simplicity-Minded Management. Harvard Business Review, 85(12), 101-109.
  • Bieńkowska, A., & Tworek, K. (2019). Job performance model based on Employees' Dynamic Capabilities (EDC). Raporty Wydziału Informatyki i Zarządzania Politechniki Wrocławskiej, Ser. PRE nr 7 [Reports of the Faculty of Computer Science and Management of the Wrocław University Science of Technology, Ser. PRE No. 7].
  • Bodell, L. (2016). Why Simple Wins: Escape the Complexity Trap and Get to Work That Matters. Routledge.
  • Brandes, D. (2013). Einfach managen: Komplexität vermeiden, reduzieren und beherrschen. Frankfurt, Germany: Redline Verlag.
  • Burns, T., & Stalker, G.M. (1961). The management of innovation. London, Great Britain: Tavistock.
  • Campos, L.M.S., de Melo Heizen, D.A., Verdinelli, M.A., & Cauchick, M.P.A. (2015). Environmental performance indicators: A study on ISO 14001 certified companies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 99, 286-296. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.03.019
  • Collinson, S., & Jay, M. (2012). From Complexity to Simplicity: Unleash Your Organisation's Potential. Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Crane, A., Palazzo, G., Spence, L.J., & Matten, D. (2014). Contesting the value of "creating shared value". California Management Review, 56(2), 130-153. doi: 10.1525/cmr.2014.56.2.130
  • Croasmun, J.T., & Ostrom, L. (2011). Using Likert-Type Scales in the Social Sciences. Journal of Adult Education, 40(1), 19-22.
  • Crozier, M. (1993). Przedsiębiorstwo na podsłuchu [L'Entreprise à l'écoute]. Warszawa, Poland: PWE.
  • Cunha, M.P., & Rego, A. (2010). Complexity, Simplicity, Simplexity. European Management Journal, 28, 85-94. doi: 10.1016/j.emj.2009.04.006
  • Donaldson, L. (2001). The contingency theory of organizations. Sage Publications.
  • Donaldson, L. (2006). The contingency theory of organizational design: challenges and opportunities. In R.M. Burton, B. Eriksen, D.D. Håkonsson, & C.C. Snow (Eds.), Organization Design. The Evolving State-of-the-Art (pp. 19-40). Boston: Springer. Retrieved from
  • Drucker, P. (1993). The Practice of Management, New York, United States: Harper Business.
  • Eisenhardt, K.H., & Sull, D.N. (2001). Strategy as Simple Rules. Harvard Business Review, 79(1), 106-116.
  • Fuchs, C., & Diamantopoulos, A. (2009). Using single-item measures for construct measurement in management research: Conceptual issues and application guidelines. Die Betriebswirtschaft, 69(2), 195-210. Retrieved from
  • Gribbin J. (2004). Deep Simplicity: Chaos, Complexity and the Emergence of Life, London, Great Britain: Allen-Lane.
  • Hamann, P.M. (2017). Towards a contingency theory of corporate planning: a systematic literature review. Management Review Quarterly, 67(4), 227-289. Retrieved from
  • Hamel, G. (2008). The future of management. Human Resource Management International Digest, 16(6). doi: 10.1108/hrmid.2008.04416fae.001
  • Hartley, J. (2014). Some thoughts on Likert-type scales. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 14(1), 83-86. doi: 10.1016/S1697-2600(14)70040-7
  • Hase, S. (2002), Simplicity in complexity: Capable people and capable organisations need each other. Paper presented at the Australian Vocational Education and Training Association conference, Melbourne, April.
  • Hopej, M., Kamiński, R., Tworek, K., Walecka-Jankowska, K., & Zgrzywa-Ziemak, A. (2017). Community-oriented culture and simple organizational structure. Organization and Management, 4A, 75-93. Retrieved from
  • Hopej-Kamińska, M., Zgrzywa-Ziemak, A., Hopej, M., Kamiński, R., & Martan, J. (2015). Simplicity as a Feature of an Organizational Structure. Argumenta Oeconomica, 1(34), 259-276. doi: 10.15611/aoe.2015.1.10
  • Leff, S., & Zolkos, R. (2015). Taming organisational complexity - start at the top, A report from The Economist Intelligence Unit. Retrieved from
  • Lumpkin, G.T., & Dess, G.G. (1995). Simplicity as a Strategy-making Process: The Effects of Stage of Organizational Development and Environment on Performance. Academy of Management Journal, 38(5), 1386-1407. doi: 10.5465/256862
  • Maeda, J. (2006). The Laws of Simplicity. Design, Technology, Business, Life. Cambridge, Great Britain: MIT Press.
  • Maletic, M., Maletic, D., Dahlgaard, J., Dahlgaard-Park, S.M., & Gomišcek, B. (2015). Do corporate sustainability practices enhance organizational economic performance? International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, 7(2), 184-200. doi:
  • Marion, R. (1999). The edge of organization: Chaos and complexity theories of formal social systems, SAGE. doi: 10.4135/9781452234052
  • Matić, I. (2012). Measuring the effects of learning on business performances: Proposed performance measurement model. The Journal of American Academy of Business, Cambridge, 18(1), 278-284. Retrieved from
  • McAdam, R., Miller, K., & McSorley, C. (2019). Towards a contingency theory perspective of quality management in enabling strategic alignment. International Journal of Production Economics, 207, 195-209. doi:
  • Miller, D. (1993). The Architecture of Simplicity. The Academy of Management Review, 18(1), 116-138. doi: 10.5465/amr.1993.3997509
  • Mintzberg, H. (1979). The Structuring of Organizations: A Synthesis of the Research. New Jersey, United States: Prentice Hall.
  • Morrish, J. (2008). Simplicity: Not as Easy as it Looks. Management Today, April, 43-45.
  • Osbert-Pociecha, G. (2013). Zmiany upraszczające w organizacji - wyniki badań sondażowych [Simplifying changes in the organization - results of survey research]. Nauki o Zarządzaniu, 4(17), 95-108. Retrieved from;7&qt=CHILDREN-STATELESS
  • Peters, T., & Waterman, R. (2004). In Search of Excellence: Lessons from America's Best-Run Companies. New York, United States: Harper Business Essentials.
  • Sandlin, J.A., & Walther, C.S. (2009). Complicated Simplicity. Moral Identity Formation and Social Movement Learning in the Voluntary Simplicity Movement. Adult Education Quarterly, 59(4), 298-317. doi: 10.1177/0741713609334137
  • Scherer, J., Hartschen, M., Bruegger, C., & Hagmann, P.J. (2013). Simplicity for Business Success! Strategies for Simple Products, Services and Processes. Offenbach, Germany: Verlag.
  • Segall, K. (2013). Insanely Simple: The Obsession That Drives Apple's Success, New York, United States: Penguin Group.
  • Segall, K. (2016). Think simple: how smart leaders defeat complexity. New York, United States: Penguin.
  • Stephenson, J., & Weil, S. (1992). Four themes in educating for capability. Quality in Learning. A Capability Approach in Higher Education. London, Great Britain: Kogan Page.
  • Welch, J., & Welch, S. (2005). Winning. New York, United States: Harper Business.
Typ dokumentu
Identyfikator YADDA

Zgłoszenie zostało wysłane

Zgłoszenie zostało wysłane

Musisz być zalogowany aby pisać komentarze.
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.