This article shows how the interplay of different function systems creates distrust and paradoxes in complex polycentric transition processes. This issue is captured by an abductive, qualitative, single‐case study on a highly polycentric pilot project in a Danish public job centre. The results suggest that the emergence of a multifunctional semantic reservoir is crucial for navigating function‐systemic blind spots by stimulating higher‐order observation and reflection and building trust in polycentric settings. This is a prerequisite for allowing paradoxes to drive transition and not become barriers. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

PurposeThe purpose is to investigate a position for engaged scholarship bridging the gulf between theorizing and practice in a social system perspective using Design Thinking for assisting the emergence of a semantic reservoir in a polycentric network “in spe”.Design/methodology/approachThe paper combines social systems theory with the concept of engaged scholarship based on Design Thinking, and illustrates how such a research position might be applied to problems of polycentric networks as a theoretical/methodological case.FindingsThe paper concludes on a possible role for an engaged scholarship as a midwife assisting the emergence of a shared semantic reservoir that is needed to make commitments and couplings possible to become a polycentric network. Design Thinking is explained as a structured way to irritate (disturb) other systems, and the role of a shared semantic reservoir for a polycentric network “in spe” is accounted for.Originality/valueBridging the gulf between theorizing and practice in management theory is under-explored, and social systems theory underlines the immanent rigor-relevance gap, which this paper suggests a way not to overcome, but to bridge. The discussion of the rigor-relevance gap is revisited. Also, the critical process for a shared semantic reservoir to emerge in the formation of poly-centric networks is underexplored and so are its role for coupling of networks. The conceptual understanding thereof is also contributed to.

PurposeCircular Economy is a policy and practice-oriented concept drawing mainly on engineering and natural science. This paper aims to contribute a conceptual development based on social systems theory. Does the Circular Economy have the prospect to become a sustainability-enhancing feedback mechanism potentializing an evolutionary systemic rearrangement of structural couplings, and will it encounter limitations as a general approach for a sustainable development?Design/methodology/approachBy using the Luhmannian theory as method, core concepts are semantics, structure and rearrangement of structural couplings. In acknowledging the social system’s operational closure, social-metabolism with nature is discussed. The research is in three stages. First, structural couplings of matter and social systems. Second, structural couplings of organizational networks closing the loop–eventually using digitalization. Third, the Circular Economy encountering multicontextuality.FindingsThe paper provides: (1) A four-stage structural coupling enacting metabolism with nature allowing measurement of circularity potentially useable for feedback “irritating” relevant social systems’ reflexion. (2) Identification of obstacles encountered in the proliferation due to paradoxes of strategic decisions in organizations, difficulties of structural couplings of organizational networks and the paradox of digitalization. (3) Help by future digitalization but simultaneously new side-effects. (4) The multicontextuality as the limitation for a broad sustainability approach.Originality/valueThe paper answers a call for more social science theoretical research on the Circular Economy. It develops core conceptualizations based on social systems theory. Also, advices for future research and practical implementation are suggested.

No abstract

This article discusses motivation theories in a historical perspective and underlines the paradoxical results sometimes occurring when applying motivation theories out of context. Some of the motivation theories from the past may result in demotivation and in organizational ineffectiveness harming the core of a business or the main purpose of an organization today. The increasing complexity, the global challenges and the rate of change demand new types of leading and managing, and the motivation theories underpinning performance management and incentive systems used not long ago, are now changing in order to facilitate caring and innovation. Also, the notion of, what drives motivation changes. Organizations that implement managerial concepts from the past, or do not adapt their approach fast enough risk losing their competitive edge.