William P. Hall National Fellow Australian Centre for Science, Innovation and Society - University of Melbourne DIS: ICT 5...
Some background <ul><li>My path to organisational KM is unique </li></ul><ul><ul><li>physics (3½ years from 1957) </li></u...
The work summarised here began ~1977 in response to paradigmatic misunderstandings over my PhD <ul><li>PhD Evol. Biol. Har...
KM is a mess in several other areas as well with too many poorly understood paradigms <ul><li>Epistemology (theory of know...
Foundation Problems in KM: We can’t even define knowledge consistently <ul><li>A few definitions from the literature </li>...
Conflicting paradigms of knowledge in KM <ul><li>Michael Polanyi (1958, 1966): personal/tacit knowledge </li></ul><ul><ul>...
Incommensurability of the paradigms <ul><li>Search dates: 11/02/2002, (15/08/2002), [14/07/2004] </li></ul><ul><li>Michael...
Key ideas for answering “What is knowledge?” <ul><li>Evolutionary biology and evolutionary epistemology </li></ul><ul><ul>...
What is knowledge? <ul><li>Karl Popper  - a philosopher who studied science </li></ul><ul><ul><li>&quot; All life is probl...
Popper's  t hree  w orlds <ul><li>Polanyi's epistemology of personal knowledge encompassed within Popper's World 2 </li></...
Karl  Popper's &quot;tetradic schema&quot; or  &quot;general theory of evolution &quot; <ul><li>P n   a real-world problem...
John Boyd's OODA Loop process wins conflicts <ul><li>An organisation's success in a competitive environment depends critic...
Some OODA definitions <ul><li>Observation   assembles   data  about the world in which the adaptive entity exists (includi...
Maturana and Varela: autopoiesis defines life <ul><li>Autopoiesis  (= self + production) is the condition achieved by a bo...
Paradigm of the autopoietic organised system <ul><li>Maturana and Varela  (1980) - Autopoiesis & Cognition – properties of...
Complexity theory:  Hierarchically complex dissipative systems  a nd the focal level (complex triad) HIGH LEVEL SYSTEM / E...
Emergence of knowledge <ul><li>Cognition   is the cybernetics of autopoiesis (Maturana) </li></ul><ul><li>Emergence  = est...
<ul><li>The nature and growth of autopoietic knowledge </li></ul><ul><li>Turbulent flow from available energy (exergy) sou...
Emergent  orders  of autopoietic complexity <ul><li>Presence of autopoietic system  self-defines  the focal level of a com...
Reproduction, sex, and diversification (1) <ul><li>World 2 knowledge transmitted by the division of pre-existing dynamic s...
Reproduction, sex, and diversification (2) <ul><li>Clonal reproduction in  prokaryotes </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Clonal evol &...
Knowledge in higher order autopoiesis (1) <ul><li>Second order systems  (multicellular organisms) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Cl...
Knowledge in higher order autopoiesis (2) <ul><li>Third order systems  (societies, organizations) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Pu...
The organisation is a complex system in the environment <ul><li>Processes (which may be complex subsystems that are autopo...
Some concepts building on autopoiesis theory and Karl Popper's theory of knowledge <ul><li>Organisations (and other living...
Knowledge in an autopoietic entity AUTOPOIETIC SYSTEM Constrain/Control Observe/Measure Recall Material Reality WORLD 1 Em...
Personal Research http://www.orgs-evolution-knowledge.net/ Emergent autopoietic vortexes forming  world 2  and  world 3  i...
Cognition (terms are meaningful in relation to autopoietic or artificially intelligent systems) <ul><li>Observation : Init...
Coombe's hierarchy in the autopoietic entity Environment Autopoietic system Cell Multicellular organism Social organisatio...
Another view Decision Medium/ Environment Autopoietic system World State 1 Perturbation Transduction Observation Memory Cl...
Paradigm of the autopoietic organization (2) <ul><li>Nelson & Winter   ( 1982 ) : Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change <...
Existing users of Autopoiesis neglect World 3 <ul><li>C urrent paradigm of organizational autopoiesis </li></ul><ul><ul><l...
Organisational knowledge in World 3 <ul><li>Persistent objects of corporate knowledge </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Articles of in...
<ul><li>END </li></ul>
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Emergence and Growth of Knowledge and Diversity in Hierarchically Complex Organised Systems:

5,023 views

Published on

Seminar presentation: University of Melbourne Department of Information Systems, 13 October, 2006. Summarises development of a biologically based theory of knowledge based on combining Karl Popper's evolutionary epistemology (as developed in his 1972 book, Objective Knowlege) and Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela's concept of autopoiesis (as developed in their 1980 book, Autopoiesis and Cognition).

Published in: Technology, Education
2 Comments
24 Likes
Statistics
Notes
No Downloads
Views
Total views
5,023
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
194
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
2
Likes
24
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Emergence and Growth of Knowledge and Diversity in Hierarchically Complex Organised Systems:

    1. 1. William P. Hall National Fellow Australian Centre for Science, Innovation and Society - University of Melbourne DIS: ICT 5.39 - 8344 1522 Head Office / Engineering Tenix Defence, Williamstown [email_address] Visiting Faculty Associate University of Technology Sydney Dept Info Sci - 13/10/2006 Emergence and Growth of Knowledge and Diversity in Hierarchically Complex Organised Systems: Genesis of a theoretical framework
    2. 2. Some background <ul><li>My path to organisational KM is unique </li></ul><ul><ul><li>physics (3½ years from 1957) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>computers (all generations from cog-wheel calculators) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>neurophysiology (2+ years as research assistant - signal processing) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>comparative ethology, comparative anatomy and ecosystem theory </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>PhD Evolutionary Biology (Harvard, 1973) - genetic system, systematics </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>personal KM in the sciences with bibliographic search engines </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>studied epistemology and scientific revolutions (1977-1979) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>I bought my first microcomputer in 1981 and it had to pay for itself </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>1980's: computer literacy journalism, software tech writing, and documenting Hogan banking systems </li></ul></ul><ul><li>With Tenix Defence since Jan 1990 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>full life of the ANZAC Ship Project - On time, on budget, all the time </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>building content authoring/management systems </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>now working on cross divisional knowledge management solutions </li></ul></ul><ul><li>This gives me some different perspectives! </li></ul>
    3. 3. The work summarised here began ~1977 in response to paradigmatic misunderstandings over my PhD <ul><li>PhD Evol. Biol. Harvard 1973 </li></ul><ul><li>University of Melbourne Research Fellow in Genetics 77-78 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Problems with reviewers of papers following my PhD led to studies in epistemology and history and philosophy of science </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Worked with computers since 1981; Tenix Defence since Jan 1990 </li></ul><ul><li>Technical writers' holy wars in 2000 over content oriented vs page oriented writing & management led to book project </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Co-evolution of cognitive tools and human cognition </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>When I got to KM organisations I found my understanding of &quot;knowledge&quot; differed from what my peers thought it was </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Had to stop writing until I understood the difference </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Solution re-formulates org theory and KM on evolutionary principles </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Reformulation now well underway with peer-reviewed published papers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>I am also reinventing the theory of life itself </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>theory of self-organizing hierarchically complex dissipative systems </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>evolutionary epistemology </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>autopoiesis </li></ul></ul></ul>
    4. 4. KM is a mess in several other areas as well with too many poorly understood paradigms <ul><li>Epistemology (theory of knowledge) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>personal knowledge (Michael Polanyi) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>objective knowledge (Karl Popper) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Organization theory (Donaldson recognises 15 paradigms) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>resource view </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>environment view </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>autopoietic view </li></ul></ul><ul><li>How to analyse knowledge in the organization </li></ul><ul><ul><li>individual view </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>social view </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>critical view </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>alternative views </li></ul></ul><ul><li>How organizations create knowledge </li></ul><ul><ul><li>cognitivist view </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>connectionist view </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>autopoietic view </li></ul></ul>Donaldson, L. 1995. American Anti-Management Theones of Organization, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press – see also McKelvey, B. 1997. Quasi-natural organization science. Organization Science 8:352-380
    5. 5. Foundation Problems in KM: We can’t even define knowledge consistently <ul><li>A few definitions from the literature </li></ul>Stenmark, D. 2002. Information vs. Knowledge: The Role of intranets in Knowledge Management . In Proceedings of HICSS-35, Hawaii, January 7-10, 2002 * * Full text free to the web Justified, true beliefs Data vested with meaning Facts and messages Choo et al. (2000) Text that answers the questions why and how Text that answers the questions who, when, what, or where Text that does not answer questions to a particular problem Quigley and Debons (1999) Experiences, values, insights, and contextual information A message meant to change the receiver’s perception A set of descrete facts Davenport and Prusak (1998) Valuable information from the human mind Data with relevance and purpose Simple observations Davenport (1997) The ability to assign meaning Data with meaning Not yet interpreted symbols Spek and Spijkervet (1997) * Commitments and beliefs created from these messages A flow of meaningful messages Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995) Truths and beliefs, perspectives and concepts, judgements and expectations, methodologies and know how Facts organised to describe a situation or condition Wiig (1993) Knowledge Information Data Author(s)
    6. 6. Conflicting paradigms of knowledge in KM <ul><li>Michael Polanyi (1958, 1966): personal/tacit knowledge </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Focus </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>knowing subjects </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>knowledge of doing, personal skills </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>belief, faith and intuition final arbiters of &quot;truth&quot; </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>followers tend to denigrate explicit knowledge to mere &quot;information&quot; </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Popularised in KM and organization theory by Nelson & Winter, Sveiby, Nonaka , von Krogh & Roos </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Popper (1972): epistemology without a knowing subject </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Knowledge grows through conjecture & refutation , i.e., criticism against reality </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Different kinds of knowledge: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Subjective or dispositional – as embodied in instantaneous structure </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Persistent or objective – in codified form </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Joe Firestone of Macroinnovation Associates one of few KM practitioners using Popperian epistemology </li></ul></ul>
    7. 7. Incommensurability of the paradigms <ul><li>Search dates: 11/02/2002, (15/08/2002), [14/07/2004] </li></ul><ul><li>Michael Polanyi &quot;Personal Knowledge&quot; </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Google hits = 1,760 (1,450) [4,040] </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Karl Popper &quot;Objective Knowledge“ </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Google hits = 1,850 (1,570) [3,730] </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Both together </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Google hits = 64 (55) [88] </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Only 1.1% of authors citing either book cited both! </li></ul><ul><li>Conclusion </li></ul><ul><ul><li>W riters concerned with one author's thinking were not interested in or could not cope with discussing the other author's thinking in the same document - even to the extent of listing them in a single bibliography. </li></ul></ul>
    8. 8. Key ideas for answering “What is knowledge?” <ul><li>Evolutionary biology and evolutionary epistemology </li></ul><ul><ul><li>J.D. Watson & Francis Crick (molecular genetics) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Ernst Mayr (was still writing in his 100 th year), Steven J. Gould </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Donald T. Campbell </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Karl Popper’s mature epistemology: 1972 and later – published in his 70 th year </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Autopoiesis ( auto = ‘self’ + poiesis = ‘production’) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Humberto Maturana & Francisco Varela </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Chilean neurobiologists working in the 1970’s </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Defining what it means to be alive </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Emergence of complex hierarchical systems </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Hebert Simon, Ilya Prigogine, Stuart Kauffman </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Biosemiotics </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Howard Pattee, Luis M Rocha, Hoffmeyer & Emmeche </li></ul></ul>
    9. 9. What is knowledge? <ul><li>Karl Popper - a philosopher who studied science </li></ul><ul><ul><li>&quot; All life is problem solving &quot; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Knowledge is solutions to problems </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Epistemology summary </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Knowledge is fundamentally based on external reality </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>The ultimate authority for deciding the truth of a claim to know is its correspondence with external reality - but .... </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Claims to know are cognitively constructed </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Impossible to prove any claim to know is true (or false) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Any number of favourable tests are logically falsified by a single failure </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Any falsification can be &quot;immunised&quot; by auxiliary hypotheses </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Knowledge is fallible ( Firestone & McElroy 2003 ) </li></ul>
    10. 10. Popper's t hree w orlds <ul><li>Polanyi's epistemology of personal knowledge encompassed within Popper's World 2 </li></ul>Regulate/Control Organismic/Personal Knowledge exists in World 2 Emerges from World 1 processes Objective Knowledge forms World 3 Persistent logical Content produced / evaluated by World 2 processes © William P. Hall 3. Expressed language Computer memory Recorded thought Logical artefacts Heredity Reproduction/Production 2. Cybernetic self-regulation Consciousness Cognition Drive/Enable Development/Recall Inferred logic Describe/Predict Test Observe 1. Energy Thermodynamics Physics Chemistry Biochemistry Existence/Reality World 1
    11. 11. Karl Popper's &quot;tetradic schema&quot; or &quot;general theory of evolution &quot; <ul><li>P n a real-world problem faced by an entity </li></ul><ul><li>TS a tentative solution or tentative theory </li></ul><ul><li>EE a process of error elimination </li></ul><ul><li>P n+1 changed problem as faced from by an entity incorporating a surviving solution </li></ul><ul><li>TS may be embodied in W2 in the individual entity, or </li></ul><ul><li>TS may be expressed in words as a hypothesis in W3, subject to objective criticism </li></ul><ul><li>Objective expression and criticism lets our theories die in our stead </li></ul><ul><li>As an iterated cyclic process, solutions can approach reality </li></ul>TS 1 TS 2 • • • • • TS m P n P n +1 EE TS 1 TS 2 • • • • • TS m P n P n +1 EE TS 1 TS 2 • • • • • TS m P n P n +1 EE
    12. 12. John Boyd's OODA Loop process wins conflicts <ul><li>An organisation's success in a competitive environment depends critically its ability to do a better job of assimilating information, increasing its epistemic quality to generate strategic power, and reducing decision cycle times. See http://www. belisarius .com . </li></ul>A O OBSERVE (Results of Test) OBSERVATION PARADIGMS EXTERNAL INFORMATION CHANGING CIRCUMSTANCES UNFOLDING ENVIRONMENTAL RESULTS OF ACTIONS ORIENT D DECIDE (Hypothesis) O CULTURE PARADIGMS PROCESSES GENETIC HERITAGE MEMORY OF HISTORY INPUT ANALYSIS SYNTHESIS ACT (Test) GUIDANCE AND CONTROL PARADIGMS UNFOLDING INTERACTION WITH EXTERNAL ENVIRONMENT
    13. 13. Some OODA definitions <ul><li>Observation assembles data about the world in which the adaptive entity exists (including the entity's own effects and those of its competitors on that world). Data is given a context relating to the entity's interactions with the world. </li></ul><ul><li>Orientation processes that observations into semantically linked knowledge in the form of a world view comprised of </li></ul><ul><ul><li>new information , </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>memories of prior experience (which may be explicit, implicit or even tacit, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>genetic heritage (i.e., &quot;natural talent&quot; ) , </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>cultural traditions (i.e., paradigms), and </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>analysis (destruction) of the existing world view, and synthesis (creation) of a revised world view including possibilities for action. This generates intelligence (in a military sense). </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Decision selects amongst possible actions generated by the orientation, action(s) to try. Choice is governed and informed by </li></ul><ul><ul><li>wisdom based on prior experience gained from previous OODA cycles, and </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>the synthesis (creation) of new possibilities to try. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Action involves putting the decision to test by applying it to the world. The loop begins to repeat as the entity observes the results of its action. </li></ul>
    14. 14. Maturana and Varela: autopoiesis defines life <ul><li>Autopoiesis (= self + production) is the condition achieved by a bounded and self-regulating autocatalytic set of processes able to maintain its existence as an autonomous entity in the face of environmental perturbations; i.e., that which gives a living entity the property of life. </li></ul><ul><li>Recognizing an autopoietic entity (see von Krogh & Roos) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Self-identifiably bounded (membranes, tags) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Individually identifiable components within the boundary (complex) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Mechanistic (i.e., metabolism/cybernetic processes) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>System boundaries internally determined (self reference) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>System intrinsically produces own components </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Self-produced components are necessary and sufficient to produce the system (autonomy) </li></ul></ul>
    15. 15. Paradigm of the autopoietic organised system <ul><li>Maturana and Varela (1980) - Autopoiesis & Cognition – properties of living things </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Early 1970s quest to define the property of life </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Autonomous entities defined by self regulation and self production </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Emergence </li></ul><ul><ul><li>I. Prigogine - Nobel Laureate </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Principles of non-equilibrium thermodynamics </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>H. Simon (1962) – Architecture of Complex Systems </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>H. Morowitz (1968) – Energy Flow in Biology: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Systems forced through time to evolve increasingly complex cycles to transport energy/matter from sources to sinks </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>J.J. Kay (1984) – Self-organization in living systems </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>S. Salthe (1985, 1993) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>emergence in a scalar hierarchy </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>S. Kauffman (1993) – Origins of Order: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>&quot;autocatalytic sets&quot; </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>&quot;organization for free&quot; </li></ul></ul></ul>
    16. 16. Complexity theory: Hierarchically complex dissipative systems a nd the focal level (complex triad) HIGH LEVEL SYSTEM / ENVIRONMENT SYSTEM SYSTEM SYSTEM SUBSYSTEMS boundary conditions, constraints, regulations FOCAL LEVEL Possibilities initiating conditions universal laws &quot;material - causes&quot; <ul><li>Emergent </li></ul><ul><li>properties </li></ul><ul><li>Synthesis cannot predict higher level properties </li></ul><ul><li>B ehaviour is uncomputable </li></ul><ul><li>Boundary conditions & constraints select </li></ul><ul><li>Analysis can explain </li></ul><ul><li>Stanley Salthe (1993) Development and Evolution: Complexity and Change in Biology </li></ul>
    17. 17. Emergence of knowledge <ul><li>Cognition is the cybernetics of autopoiesis (Maturana) </li></ul><ul><li>Emergence = establishment of a complex system at a new level in the hierarchy between two pre-existing levels of complexity (Salthe) </li></ul><ul><li>Early autopoietic systems emerge close to thermodynamic equilibrium between coalescence/disintegration (Kauffman's autocatalytic sets) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Autopoietic systems produce more components that favour autopoiesis </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Dis-integrationg systems lose history, but return components to the environment that have previously worked in autopoietic systems </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Knowledge of autopoiesis is inherent in the environment, thus shared promiscuously </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Promiscuity impedes specialisation because random components need to work together </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Early reproduction requires only growth and fragmentation - where fragments would retain some of the parent's history </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Selection for self-stabilization evolves towards clonal reproduction away from equilibrium, to preserve structural history that worked </li></ul><ul><li>Knowledge defines the nature and behaviour of the autopoietic system </li></ul><ul><li>Meaning = knowledge of solutions to life embodied in dynamic structure </li></ul><ul><li>Knowledge = heredity = historically accumulated 'information' controlling autopoietic cybernetics to regulate problem responses </li></ul>
    18. 18. <ul><li>The nature and growth of autopoietic knowledge </li></ul><ul><li>Turbulent flow from available energy (exergy) sources to entropy sinks forces conducting systems to become more organised (state of decreased entropy ) - Prigogine, Morowitz, Kay and Schneider, Kauffman ) </li></ul><ul><li>Coalescent systems have no past . Self-regulatory/self-productive (autocatalytic) activities that persist for a time before disintegrating produce components whose individual histories &quot;precondition&quot; them to form autopoietic systems. Each emerged autopoietic system represents a tentative solution to problems of life. Those that dis-integrate lose their histories (heredity/knowledge). </li></ul><ul><li>Stable systems are those whose tentative solutions enable them to persist indefinitely. Competition among such systems for resources is inevitable. Survivors thus perpetuate historically successful solutions into their self-produced structure to form dispositional or tacit knowledge (W2). Those that fail to solve new problems dis-integrate and lose their histories. </li></ul><ul><li>Replication, transcription and translation . With semantic coding and decoding, knowledge can be preserved and replicated in physiologically inert forms for recall only when relevant to a particular problem of life. Objective knowledge may be shared across space and through time . - Howard Pattee (1965-2000) series of papers; Luis Rocha (1995-) series of papers. </li></ul>Knowledge: a phenomenon of emergent and evolving autopoiesis Tentative solutions Coalescence / Emergence † Stable solutions Stabilised autopoiesis † Selected solutions Dispositional autopoiesis † Semiotic autopoiesis Knowledge sharing Shared solutions † Criticised solutions Dis-integration Integration Turbulence Evolutionary Stage
    19. 19. Emergent orders of autopoietic complexity <ul><li>Presence of autopoietic system self-defines the focal level of a complex triad </li></ul><ul><li>1st order triad </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Focal level = living cell </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Subsystems/components = macromolecules </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Supersystem/environment = dynamic medium/ecosystem/multicellular organisms </li></ul></ul><ul><li>2nd order triad </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Focal level = multicellular organism </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Subsystems/components = living cells </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Supersystem/environment = dynamic ecosystem </li></ul></ul><ul><li>3rd order triad </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Focal level = society of organisms (ants, bees, termites) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Subsystems/components = multicellular organisms </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Supersystems/environment = dynamic ecosystem </li></ul></ul><ul><li>3rd order triad </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Focal level = human economic organization </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Subsystems/components = entities with linguistic capabilities </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Supersystems/environment = dynamic economy </li></ul></ul>
    20. 20. Reproduction, sex, and diversification (1) <ul><li>World 2 knowledge transmitted by the division of pre-existing dynamic structure </li></ul><ul><ul><li>inescapable consequence of autopoiesis </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>entails some loss of computationally irreducible structure </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>depends on what parts of structure passed on </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Emergence of world 3 knowledge depends on evolution of codification systems </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Autocatalytic nucleic acid polymers in emergence of first order autopoiesis. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Nucleic acid polymers may have enzymatic and/or structural fns </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Autoreplication of polymer replicates the polymer's functions </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>RNAs retain structural & enzymatic functions to apply control info </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>DNAs codified control information into &quot;genes&quot; </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Selective advantages for grouping genes into chromosomes </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Accurate replication </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Controlled segregation into daughter cells </li></ul></ul></ul>
    21. 21. Reproduction, sex, and diversification (2) <ul><li>Clonal reproduction in prokaryotes </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Clonal evol & differentiation of coadapted snippets in lineages </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Advantage: Protected accuracy of existing world 3 knowledge </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Disadvantage: Reduced ability to recombine tested knowledge from different sources in one lineage </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Sexual recombination totally independent from reproduction </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Transformation (naked DNA absorbed from environment) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Transduction (viral transfer) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Conjugation (transfer of plasmid DNA via cell bridge) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Recognition of related & rejection of unrelated DNA sequences </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Pairing & crossing over of homologous DNA </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Eukaryote DNA well isolated from external exchanges </li></ul><ul><li>Choreographed cell & nuclear fusion </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Choreographed recombination and assortment </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Specialised knowledge allows emergence of biological speciation and gene pools as evolutionary entities </li></ul></ul>
    22. 22. Knowledge in higher order autopoiesis (1) <ul><li>Second order systems (multicellular organisms) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Clonal budding and alternation of generations common in lower orgs </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>W2 knowledge transmitted via structure of egg cell </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Learning reflected in structural connections of neurones and other aspects of dispositional structure (physiological adaptation) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Most dispositional (somatic) learning cannot be transferred via sexual reproduction </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Extended parental care can transfer some W2 knowledge via demonstration and copying (i.e., tacit exchange) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>W3 knowledge in DNA </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>All cells have same DNA </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Some DNA is control info for cell differentiation and development </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Only evolves via blind variation and selective elimination of carriers </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>W3 knowledge in extrasomatic heritage </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Evolution of semiotic/linguistic transfers </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Encoded objects </li></ul></ul></ul>
    23. 23. Knowledge in higher order autopoiesis (2) <ul><li>Third order systems (societies, organizations) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Pubs: Hall 2003, 2005, 2006; Else 2004; Hall et al. 2005; Nousala et al, 2005; Dalmaris et al. 2007 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>W2 knowledge </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>layout and capabilities of plant and machinery </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>social network structure </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>tacit organizational routines </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>tacit personal knowledge </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>cultural dynamics </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>W3 knowledge </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>part of DNA at level of individual organisms encodes adaptations for social behaviours </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>pheromonal trails, published inducements, etc. </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>records and documents of organizational significance </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>explicitly defined processes and procedures </li></ul></ul></ul>
    24. 24. The organisation is a complex system in the environment <ul><li>Processes (which may be complex subsystems that are autopoietic in their own rights) are necessary responses to imperatives: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Survival </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Self-maintenance of the processes themselves </li></ul></ul>Constraints and boundaries (laws of nature determine what is possible) Processes The organisation's imperatives and goals Energy (exergy) Recruitment Materials Income Observations Entropy/Waste Products Departures Expenses Actions
    25. 25. Some concepts building on autopoiesis theory and Karl Popper's theory of knowledge <ul><li>Organisations (and other living things) are complex dissipative systems emerging from the medium </li></ul><ul><li>They consume environmental resources that are limited </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Resources </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>People </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Income </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Sinks for entropically degraded materials/devalued energy </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Competition limits survival </li></ul></ul>WORLD 1 (&quot;everything&quot;) Medium or supersystem Resources People Economics Information Constraints { Organisation 1 Organisation 3 Organisation 2 Organisation 4
    26. 26. Knowledge in an autopoietic entity AUTOPOIETIC SYSTEM Constrain/Control Observe/Measure Recall Material Reality WORLD 1 Embodied cybernetic knowledge WORLD 2 ITERATION/SELECTION THROUGH TIME Produce Symbolically encoded knowledge/ memory WORLD 3
    27. 27. Personal Research http://www.orgs-evolution-knowledge.net/ Emergent autopoietic vortexes forming world 2 and world 3 in a flux of exergy to entropy World 1  Flux along the focal level  Symbolic knowledge Embodied knowledge Autonomy Autocatalytic metabolism Material cycles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Exergy source Entropy sink
    28. 28. Cognition (terms are meaningful in relation to autopoietic or artificially intelligent systems) <ul><li>Observation : Initial change induced within the autopoietic system by a perturbation </li></ul><ul><li>Classification ( / decision ): Process by which an induced change results in the system settling into one of alternative attractor basins on a landscape of potential gradients </li></ul><ul><li>Meaning : The net result in the system due to the initial propagation and classification of an observation </li></ul><ul><li>Coombe's Hierarchy (Australian Army Info Mgmt Manual) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Data : The atomic level of meaning </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Information (first level of synthesis): Classified observations assembled into relationship structures </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Knowledge (second level of synthesis): Semantically identified and linked information </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Intelligence (third level of synthesis): Tentative theory(ies) about the world based on knowledge </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Wisdom (fourth level of synthesis): Solutions after the elimination of errors through testing theories against the world </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Strategic power (the result): Wisdom applied to control the world </li></ul></ul>
    29. 29. Coombe's hierarchy in the autopoietic entity Environment Autopoietic system Cell Multicellular organism Social organisation State Perturbations Observations ( data ) Classification Meaning An &quot;attractor basin&quot; Related information Memory of history Semantic processing to form knowledge Predict, propose Intelligence
    30. 30. Another view Decision Medium/ Environment Autopoietic system World State 1 Perturbation Transduction Observation Memory Classification Evaluation Synthesis Processing Paradigm Assemble Response Internal changes Effect action Effect Iterate Conscious OODA Loop in Material Terms Codified knowledge Observed internal changes Time World State 2
    31. 31. Paradigm of the autopoietic organization (2) <ul><li>Nelson & Winter ( 1982 ) : Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Postulated that organizational knowledge transcends knowledge of individual members to form organizational heredity to maintain the existence and behaviour of the organization (i.e., self-production). </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Assumed this t ranscendent knowledge was tacit (Polanyi) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>physical layout </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>routines </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>contexts </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>connections </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>von Krogh and Roos (1995) Organizational Epistemology </li></ul>
    32. 32. Existing users of Autopoiesis neglect World 3 <ul><li>C urrent paradigm of organizational autopoiesis </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Blind spot: Maturana & Varela legitimately did not include reproduction in their minimal definition of autopoiesis </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>As stated the concept does not consider persistent heredity transcending the life of a single entity </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Nelson & Winter </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Focus on tacit personal & organizational knowledge </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Represents late 1970s early 1980s thinking </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>As they were writing, world 3 organizational content largely consisted of data, information & transaction records, not knowledge </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Roles of persistent knowledge (heredity) to guide growth & maintenance of the living organization </li></ul><ul><li>The exception is Hugo Urrestarazu (2004) On Boundaries of Autopoietic Systems </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Three domains: phenomenological, &quot;biological&quot;, &quot;languaging </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Funct. equivalent to Popper's 3 worlds </li></ul></ul>
    33. 33. Organisational knowledge in World 3 <ul><li>Persistent objects of corporate knowledge </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Articles of incorporation & employment agreements </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Contracts </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>E-mails & correspondence </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Graphics and drawings </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Plans, records, process & procedure documents </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Enacted workflow systems </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Written history </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Links & captured contexts </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Databases </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>AV recordings </li></ul></ul><ul><li>World 3 comprises the bulk of organizational memory or heredity </li></ul>
    34. 34. <ul><li>END </li></ul>

    ×