Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to present a reflection that can contribute to the discussion of the possibility, or not, of measuring the complexity of any given system. Design/methodology/approach -The reflection takes place considering three aspects: the first one, of an etymological character, with the purpose to specify the semantics of complexity. The second, epistemological, refers to the forms of complexity measuring in different domains. And the third, of an ontological character, refers to the essential in the complexity of reality, which contains to the observer who observes and that is observes himself. Findings -It is proposed to reserve the word complex to refer to systems that are treated as an undecomposed and irreducible totality and the act of measuring does not take place; while the expression complicated may be used when the act of reduction takes place by measuring the system. Research limitations/implications -The statement made claims to be revised, criticized, questioned, confronted . . . , with the aim to enrich it and accept it, or else to reject it and discard it. Originality/value -There is some degree of originality, with respect to other works, that deals with the measurement of complexity, but which does not refer to the distinction that it is possible to establish between complexity and complication, with its epistemological implications and in particular with the challenge of its quantification.

Purpose-The purpose of this paper is to propose, from the way in which an allopathic physician makes a diagnosis of a person's health, an organizational diagnosis metaphor that can contribute in the search for an increasingly more integral way of qualifying an organization as healthy. Design/methodology/approach-The methodological approach is essentially functional and is based on the cybernetics of W.R. Ashby with respect to the concept of a model and especially on "iso-" and "homomorphisms." In this way, similarities are found between the behavior of the components observed by the physician in a person, according to his diagnostic guidelines, and the functioning of an organization. Findings-The paper finds that various authors recognize the value and power of the use of metaphors, following the spirit of L.V. Bertalanffy, in the search for a better understanding of the organizational phenomenon, particularly that of human health, including the definition of the World Health Organization, from which a way is proposed here to understand a healthy organization and a general model of organizational diagnosis. It is estimated that one of the most significant finding made so far is the need to formalize structurally dependencies meant to apply "organizational awareness" as a way of permanently reflecting on the organization, helping its members to distinguish what belongs to the person and what belongs to the emergent phenomenon called organization, a task that until now is done partially, considering only some actors and at some points in time. Strategic planning, coaching higher executives, and empowerment of employees have gone in that direction, but still show insufficient efforts. Research limitations/implications-The work done so far has consisted in the theoretical development of homomorphism and some applications about which it is not yet possible make a report because of their scarcity. However, this method of work has made it possible to refeed the initial model and make some adjustments according to the divergencies seen between the theoretical and the practical. Consequently, this is a proposal that requires discussion-the purpose of this communication-and further experimentation that may lead to its eventual validation. Practical implications-The proposal of a general model for making organizational diagnoses. Originality/value-Some degree of originality is considered with respect to known work, because the idea is to articulate a model having an integral character that allows an organization to be qualified as healthy, trying to go beyond partial views that attributed that condition to organizations that were seen from a particular perspective, such as the health of its workers or its economic-financial performance.

Purpose – To contribute to the search for new viewpoints that will enrich the understanding of the complex organizational phenomenon, in particular by contributing to the development of a method that allows qualifying, in the fullest possible way, whether an organization can be said to be healthy. So the objective of this work has been to experiment with the diagnostic method of the organizational health situation – proposed in a previous paper published in this journal – through applications that allowed backfeeding it and offering a new improved version of it. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach – The present work takes up the challenge of advancing in the development of the method of determining the health condition of an organization, revising the general homomorphism as well as the information that will be considered, its sources, the way of obtaining it, and the way of making the synthesis that will allow issuing the final overall judgement of healthy or not of the organization that is being studied. To that end, recourse is made to the experience obtained from eight applications made to different kinds of small organizations in the city of Santiago, Chile, from 2008 to 2012. Findings – The human-being/organization homomorphism was reformulated, going from eight component systems of the human body to 13, by reformulating some and incorporating others. Although a set of indicators may be used in different kinds of organizations, each one of them also presents a specificity that makes it highly complicated to make comparisons; the health situation of an organization is related only to itself. Consequently, the set of indicators that are selected to determine the health condition of an organization depends on itself. Not all the variables, systems and dimensions have the same weight for those interested in the overall health judgement to be issued, so this task of searching for the weights becomes a key aspect of the method: what was found to be most advisable was to set up a group of experts composed of key informants belonging to the organization itself and of external analysts. The symptoms – perceptions of the key informants – must be transformed into signs that allow objectifying the judgement of healthy or not of an organization. Originality/value – The work contributes new elements that enrich the method for diagnosing organizational health proposed earlier, starting from the homomorphism established between the way in which allopathic physicians study their patients and the way the analyst operates with an organization.

No abstract

PurposeThis paper offers a framework based on the key principles of the complexity paradigm proposed by Edgar Morin to review what can be considered the dominant approach towards knowledge management, i.e. the intellectual capital construct. The purpose of this paper is to identify epistemological weaknesses to offer insights for the improvement of the theory and practice on knowledge management.Design/methodology/approachBased on the complexity paradigm and its dialogic and recursive principles, a framework to understand knowledge is offered comprising three interrelated requirements, each of which is based on a pair of opposites, arguably critical for the conceptualisation of a complex knowledge: order and disorder, whole and parts, and non‐logical and logical modes of thinking. This tool is applied to reviewing the epistemological assumptions under the intellectual capital approach, in order to find insights for further research on knowledge management. The task has an interpretative character and is carried out highlighting central aspects of the intellectual capital construct.FindingsAs a result it is possible to point out that the intellectual capital approach does not fulfill the complexity requirements, since it only recognises at the level of human beings their objective and functional aspects of knowledge, given by qualifications and other features that can be measured on the one hand, and driven a priori by a functional strategy, on the other. It ignores, in consequence, the more unstructured and disordered aspect of knowledge which, from a complexity perspective, is constitutive for the creation of innovative ideas.Research limitations/implicationsThe study is fully centered on intellectual capital literature. A complementary review of other less used expressions of knowledge management such as the construct of “communities of practice”, applying the same diagnostic tool, could enrich the conclusions and theoretical proposals.Practical implicationsA framework for the detection of epistemological biases is offered and used in this paper to study the intellectual capital construct, which could be also applied for other knowledge‐based settings. For business managers and consultants dealing with knowledge management, this paper can also give some insights for the improvement of their organisational interventions.Originality/valueA novel approach, the complexity paradigm, is proposed as the epistemological standpoint to improve theory and practice on knowledge management.