Skip main navigation
Close Drawer MenuOpen Drawer Menu
Articles

When Everything Interacts with Everything Else: Intervening in Messes

    Published Online:14 Feb 2023https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2020.0159

    Abstract

    There is growing interest among management scholars, policy-makers, and practitioners in understanding and addressing deep-seated societal problems, often termed “wicked problems,” “grand challenges,” or “messes.” An expansive body of research and practice-based literature has appeared, with little evidence to date of synthesis across research streams, tools, and practices. We also note a bifurcation between management scholarship and practice in this area that hinders cumulative learning and cross-fertilization to inform practice and policy questions. In this paper, we introduce the RAFFT framework, composed of five interrelated themes that underpin messiness (rules, agency, feedback, frames and tensions) and are grounded in knowledge triangulated across thought worlds from research and practice. Supported by illustrative examples from research and practice, we present this heuristic framework as both a diagnostic tool and an intervention repertoire. We hope that this framework can serve as a starting point for further development by researchers and practitioners working more closely together to build cumulative knowledge.

    REFERENCES

    • Ackoff, R. 1997. Systems, messes and interactive planning. In E. TristF. EmeryH. Murray (Eds.), The social engagement of social science, volume 3: A Tavistock anthology—The socio-ecological perspective: 417–438. Philadelphia, PA: University of Philadelphia Press. Google Scholar
    • Andreotti, V., Stein, S., Pashby, K., & Nicolson, M. 2016. Social cartographies as performative devices in research on higher education. Higher Education Research & Development, 35: 84–99. Google Scholar
    • Arthur, W. B. 2010. Complexity, the Santa Fe approach, and non-equilibrium economics. History of Economic Ideas, 18: 149–166. Google Scholar
    • Ashby, W. R. 1961. An introduction to cybernetics. London, U.K.: Chapman & Hall. Google Scholar
    • Barberá-Tomás, D., Castelló, I., De Bakker, F. G., & Zietsma, C. 2019. Energizing through visuals: How social entrepreneurs use emotion-symbolic work for social change. Academy of Management Journal, 62: 1789–1817.Link , Google Scholar
    • Bartunek, J. M., Balogun, J., & Do, B. 2011. Considering planned change anew: Stretching large group interventions strategically, emotionally, and meaningfully. Academy of Management Annals, 5: 1–52.Link , Google Scholar
    • Battilana, J., Leca, B., & Boxenbaum, E. 2009. How actors change institutions: Towards a theory of institutional entrepreneurship. Academy of Management Annals, 3: 65–107.Link , Google Scholar
    • Benford, R. D., & Snow, D. A. 2000. Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment. Annual Review of Sociology, 26: 611–639. Google Scholar
    • Bloomberg News. 2022, April 1. Putin may collect $321 billion windfall if oil and gas keep flowing. Bloomberg. Retrieved from https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-04-01/putin-may-collect-321-billion-windfall-if-oil-gas-keep-flowing Google Scholar
    • Bowen, F. E., Bansal, P., & Slawinski, N. 2018. Scale matters: The scale of environmental issues in corporate collective actions. Strategic Management Journal, 39: 1411–1436. Google Scholar
    • Brammer, S., Branicki, L., & Linnenluecke, M. 2020. COVID-19, Societalization and the Future of Business in Society. Academy of Management Perspectives, 34: 493–507.Link , Google Scholar
    • Brammer, S., Branicki, L., Linnenluecke, M., & Smith, T. 2019. Grand challenges in management research: Attributes, achievements, and advancement. Australian Journal of Management, 44: 517–533. Google Scholar
    • Bryson, J. M., Ackermann, F., & Eden, C. 2016. Discovering collaborative advantage: The contributions of goal categories and visual strategy mapping. Public Administration Review, 76: 912–925. Google Scholar
    • Cabaj, M. 2014. Evaluating collective impact: Five simple rules. Philanthropist, 26: 109–124. Google Scholar
    • Carson, R. 2002. Silent spring. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Google Scholar
    • Cartel, M., Boxenbaum, E., & Aggeri, F. 2019. Just for fun! How experimental spaces stimulate innovation in institutionalized fields. Organization Studies, 40: 65–92. Google Scholar
    • Castellani, B., & Gerrits, L. 2021. Map of the complexity sciences. Retrieved from https://www.art-sciencefactory.com/complexity-map_feb09.html Google Scholar
    • Chapin, F. S., III, Randerson, J. T., McGuire, A. D., Foley, J. A., & Field, C. B. 2008. Changing feedbacks in the climate–biosphere system. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 6: 313–320. Google Scholar
    • Claus, L., Greenwood, R., & Mgoo, J. 2021. Institutional translation gone wrong: The case of villages for Africa in rural Tanzania. Academy of Management Journal, 64: 1497–1526.Link , Google Scholar
    • Cornelissen, J. P., & Werner, M. D. 2014. Putting framing in perspective: A review of framing and frame analysis across the management and organizational literature. Academy of Management Annals, 8: 181–235.Link , Google Scholar
    • Costanza, R., Cumberland, J. H., Daly, H., Goodland, R., & Norgaard, R. B. 1997. An introduction to ecological economics. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. Google Scholar
    • Dattee, B., & Barlow, J. 2017. Multilevel organizational adaptation: Scale invariance in the Scottish healthcare system. Organization Science, 28: 301–319. Google Scholar
    • De Savigny, D., & Adam, T. 2009. Systems thinking for health systems strengthening. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization. Google Scholar
    • Dewulf, A., Gray, B., Putnam, L., Lewicki, R., Aarts, N., Bouwen, R., & van Woerkum, C. 2009. Disentangling approaches to framing in conflict and negotiation research: A meta-paradigmatic perspective. Human Relations, 62: 155–193. Google Scholar
    • Donaghey, J., & Reinecke, J. 2018. When industrial democracy meets corporate social responsibility—A comparison of the Bangladesh accord and alliance as responses to the Rana Plaza disaster. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 56: 14–42. Google Scholar
    • Eisenberg, E. M. 1984. Ambiguity as strategy in organizational communication. Communication Monographs, 51: 227–242. Google Scholar
    • Feront, C., & Bertels, S. 2021. The impact of frame ambiguity on field-level change. Organization Studies, 42: 1135–1165. Google Scholar
    • Ferraro, F., Etzion, D., & Gehman, J. 2015. Tackling grand challenges pragmatically: Robust action revisited. Organization Studies, 36: 363–390. Google Scholar
    • Forrester, J. W. 1994. System dynamics, systems thinking, and soft OR. System Dynamics Review, 10: 245–256. Google Scholar
    • Gaim, M., Clegg, S., & Cunha, M. P. e. 2021. Managing impressions rather than emissions: Volkswagen and the false mastery of paradox. Organization Studies, 42: 949–970. Google Scholar
    • George, G., Howard-Grenville, J., Joshi, A., & Tihanyi, L. 2016. Understanding and Tackling Societal Grand Challenges through Management Research. Academy of Management Journal, 59: 1880–1895.Link , Google Scholar
    • Giddens, A. 1984. The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Google Scholar
    • Hampden-Turner, C. 1990. Charting the corporate mind: Graphic solutions to business conflicts. New York, NY: The Free Press. Google Scholar
    • Hampel, C. E., Lawrence, T. B., & Tracey, P. 2017. Institutional work: Taking stock and making it matter. In R. GreenwoodC. OliverT. B. LawrenceR. E. Meyer (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism: 558–590. London, U.K.: Sage Publications. Google Scholar
    • Hardy, C., & Maguire, S. 2010. Discourse, field-configuring events, and change in organizations and institutional fields: Narratives of DDT and the Stockholm Convention. Academy of Management Journal, 53: 1365–1392.Link , Google Scholar
    • Hardy, C., & Maguire, S. 2016. Institutional entrepreneurship and change in fields. In R. GreenwoodC. OliverT. B. LawrenceR. E. Meyer (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism: 261–280. London, U.K.: Sage Publications. Google Scholar
    • Head, B. W., & Alford, J. 2015. Wicked problems: Implications for public policy and management. Administration & Society, 47: 711–739. Google Scholar
    • Hechtman, H. 2017. Embracing the messy, unpredictable journey. Retrieved from https://www.tamarackcommunity.ca/latest/embracing-the-messy-unpredictable-journey Google Scholar
    • Heidrich, D., & Nakonieczna-Bartosiewicz, J. 2021. Young activists as international norm entrepreneurs: A case study of Greta Thunberg’s campaigning on climate change in Europe and beyond. Studia Europejskie-Studies in European Affairs, 25: 117–152. Google Scholar
    • Heracleous, L. 2020. Janus strategy. Seattle, WA: KDP Publishing. Google Scholar
    • Howard-Grenville, J., & Spengler, J. 2022. Surfing the grand challenges wave in management scholarship: How did we get here, where are we now, and what’s next? In A. A. GümüsayE. MartiH. Trittin-UlbrichC. Wickert (Eds.), Organizing for societal grand challenges (Research in the sociology of organizations, Vol. 79): 279–295. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald Publishing. Google Scholar
    • Jarzabkowski, P., Bednarek, R., Chalkias, K., & Cacciatori, E. 2021. Enabling rapid financial response to disasters: Knotting and reknotting multiple paradoxes in interorganizational systems. Academy of Management Journal. Doi: 10.5465/amj.2019.0745. Google Scholar
    • Johnson, B. 1992. Polarity management: Identifying and managing unsolvable problems. Pelham, MA: HRD Press. Google Scholar
    • Jolin, M., Schmitz, P., & Seldon, W. 2012. Needle-moving community collaboratives: A promising approach to addressing America’s biggest challenges. Retrieved from https://www.bridgespan.org/bridgespan/Images/articles/needle-moving-community-collaboratives/needle-moving-community-collaboratives.pdf Google Scholar
    • Jones, J., York, J. G., Vedula, S., Conger, M., & Lenox, M. 2019. The collective construction of green building: Industry transition toward environmentally beneficial practices. Academy of Management Perspectives, 33: 425–449.Link , Google Scholar
    • Jorgenson, J., & Steier, F. 2013. Frames, framing, and designed conversational processes: Lessons from the world cafe. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 49: 388–405. Google Scholar
    • Kania, J., & Kramer, M. 2011. Collective impact. Stanford Social Innovation Review, Winter: 36–41. Google Scholar
    • Kayser, C., Seidler, M., & Johnson, B. 2017. Paradox and polarities: Finding common ground and moving forward together. In W. K. SmithM. W. LewisP. JarzabkowskiA. Langley (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of organizational paradox: 547–570. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
    • Kim, A., Bansal, P., & Haugh, H. 2019. No time like the present: How a present time perspective can foster sustainable development. Academy of Management Journal, 62: 607–634.Link , Google Scholar
    • King, A. A., & Pucker, K. P. 2020. The dangerous allure of win-win strategies. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 19: 35–39. Google Scholar
    • Lampel, J., & Meyer, A. D. 2008. Field-configuring events as structuring mechanisms: How conferences, ceremonies, and trade shows constitute new technologies, industries, and markets. Journal of Management Studies, 45: 1025–1035. Google Scholar
    • Lefsrud, L. M., & Meyer, R. E. 2012. Science or science fiction? Professionals’ discursive construction of climate change. Organization Studies, 33: 1477–1506. Google Scholar
    • Lewis, M. W. 2000. Exploring paradox: Toward a more comprehensive guide. Academy of Management Review, 25: 760–776.Link , Google Scholar
    • Maguire, S., & Hardy, C. 2009. Discourse and deinstitutionalization: The decline of DDT. Academy of Management Journal, 52: 148–178.Link , Google Scholar
    • Markman, G. D., Waldron, T. L., Gianiodis, P. T., & Espina, M. I. 2019. E pluribus unum: Impact entrepreneurship as a solution to grand challenges. Academy of Management Perspectives, 33: 371–382.Link , Google Scholar
    • Maruyama, M. 1963. The second cybernetics: Deviation-amplifying mutual causal processes. American Scientist, 51: 164–179. Google Scholar
    • Meadows, D. H. 2008. Thinking in systems: A primer. Hartford, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing. Google Scholar
    • Meadows, D. H., Randers, J., & Meadows, D. L. 2013. The limits to growth. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Google Scholar
    • Meyer, M. A., Cross, J. E., & Byrne, Z. S. 2016. Frame decoupling for organizational change: Building support across divergent stakeholders. Organization & Environment, 29: 231–251. Google Scholar
    • Negrini, S., Ceravolo, M., Côté, P., & Arienti, C. 2021. A systematic review that is “rapid” and “living”: A specific answer to the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 138: 194–198. Google Scholar
    • Noblit, G. W., & Hare, R. D. 1988. Meta-ethnography: Synthesizing qualitative studies. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Google Scholar
    • Ostrom, E. 2010. Beyond markets and states: Polycentric governance of complex economic systems. American Economic Review, 100: 641–672. Google Scholar
    • Ostrom, E. 2011. Background on the institutional analysis and development framework. Policy Studies Journal, 39: 7–27. Google Scholar
    • Plowman, D. A., Baker, L. T., Beck, T. E., Kulkarni, M., Solansky, S. T., & Travis, D. V. 2007. Radical change accidentally: The emergence and amplification of small change. Academy of Management Journal, 50: 515–543.Link , Google Scholar
    • Pradies, C., Aust, I., Bednarek, R., Brandl, J., Carmine, S., Cheal, J., Pina e Cunha, M., Gaim, M., Keegan, A., & Lê, J. K. 2021. The lived experience of paradox: How individuals navigate tensions during the pandemic crisis. Journal of Management Inquiry, 30: 154–167. Google Scholar
    • Putnam, L. L., Fairhurst, G. T., & Banghart, S. 2016. Contradictions, dialectics, and paradoxes in organizations: A constitutive approach. Academy of Management Annals, 10: 65–171.Link , Google Scholar
    • Ramos, G., Hynes, W., Müller, J., & Lees, M. 2019. Systemic thinking for policy making: The potential of systems analysis for addressing global policy challenges in the 21st century. Paris, France: OECD Publishing. Google Scholar
    • Raworth, K. 2012. A safe and just space for humanity: Can we live within the doughnut? Oxford, U.K.: Oxfam. Google Scholar
    • Reay, T., Goodrick, E., Waldorff, S. B., & Casebeer, A. 2017. Getting leopards to change their spots: Co-creating a new professional role identity. Academy of Management Journal, 60: 1043–1070.Link , Google Scholar
    • Reinecke, J., & Ansari, S. 2016. Taming wicked problems: The role of framing in the construction of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Management Studies, 53: 299–329. Google Scholar
    • Richmond, B. 1991. Systems thinking: Four questions. Acton, MA: Creative Learning Exchange. Google Scholar
    • Rittel, H. W., & Webber, M. M. 1973. Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4: 155–169. Google Scholar
    • Schad, J., & Bansal, P. 2018. Seeing the forest and the trees: How a systems perspective informs paradox research. Journal of Management Studies, 55: 1490–1506. Google Scholar
    • Schad, J., Lewis, M. W., Raisch, S., & Smith, W. K. 2016. Paradox research in management science: Looking back to move forward. Academy of Management Annals, 10: 5–64.Link , Google Scholar
    • Scharmer, C. O. 2009. Theory U: Learning from the future as it emerges. Oakland, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers. Google Scholar
    • Schüssler, E., Rüling, C.-C., & Wittneben, B. B. 2014. On melting summits: The limitations of field-configuring events as catalysts of change in transnational climate policy. Academy of Management Journal, 57: 140–171.Link , Google Scholar
    • Scott, W. R. 2013. Institutions and organizations: Ideas, interests, and identities. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Google Scholar
    • Sellberg, M. M., Borgström, S. T., Norström, A. V., & Peterson, G. D. 2017. Improving participatory resilience assessment by cross-fertilizing the Resilience Alliance and Transition Movement approaches. Ecology and Society, 22: 1–32. Google Scholar
    • Senge, P. M. 2006. The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York, NY: Currency. Google Scholar
    • Sharma, G., Bartunek, J., Buzzanell, P. M., Carmine, S., Endres, C., Etter, M., Fairhurst, G., Hahn, T., Lê, P., & Li, X. 2021. A paradox approach to societal tensions during the pandemic crisis. Journal of Management Inquiry, 30: 121–137. Google Scholar
    • Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. 2011. Toward a theory of paradox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Academy of Management Review, 36: 381–403.Link , Google Scholar
    • Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. 2022. Both-and thinking: Embracing creative tensions to solve your toughest problems. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Review Press. Google Scholar
    • Stachowiak, S., Lynn, J., Akey, T., Beyers, J., Chew, A., Habtemariam, E., Gutierrez, J., Orians, C., Gase, L., & Roos, J. 2018. When collective impact has an impact: A cross-site study of 25 collective impact initiatives. CO: ORS Impact of Seattle, WA, and Spark Policy Institute of Denver. Google Scholar
    • Sull, D. N., & Eisenhardt, K. M. 2015. Simple rules: How to thrive in a complex world. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Google Scholar
    • Uhl-Bien, M., Marion, R., & McKelvey, B. 2007. Complexity leadership theory: Shifting leadership from the industrial age to the knowledge era. Leadership Quarterly, 18: 298–318. Google Scholar
    • Urwin, K., & Jordan, A. 2008. Does public policy support or undermine climate change adaptation? Exploring policy interplay across different scales of governance. Global Environmental Change, 18: 180–191. Google Scholar
    • Van de Ven, A. H. 2007. Engaged scholarship: A guide for organizational and social research. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
    • Verweij, M., Douglas, M., Ellis, R., Engel, C., Hendriks, F., Lohmann, S., Ney, S., Rayner, S., & Thompson, M. 2006. Clumsy solutions for a complex world: The case of climate change. Public Administration, 84: 817–843. Google Scholar
    • Weick, K. E. 1999. That’s moving theories that matter. Journal of Management Inquiry, 8: 134–142. Google Scholar
    • Weisbord, M., & Janoff, S. 2010. Future search: Getting the whole system in the room for vision, commitment, and action. Oakland, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers. Google Scholar
    • Westley, F. R., Tjornbo, O., Schultz, L., Olsson, P., Folke, C., Crona, B., & Bodin, Ö. 2013. A theory of transformative agency in linked social-ecological systems. Ecology and Society, 18: 27. Google Scholar
    • Williams, A., & Whiteman, G. 2021. A call for deep engagement for impact: Addressing the planetary emergency. Strategic Organization, 19: 526–537. Google Scholar
    • Williams, T. A., & Shepherd, D. A. 2016. Building resilience or providing sustenance: Different paths of emergent ventures in the aftermath of the Haiti earthquake. Academy of Management Journal, 59: 2069–2102.Link , Google Scholar
    • Zelson, E. 2014. Rethinking DDT: The misguided goals of the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants and a plan to fight malaria worldwide. William and Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review, 39: 243–267. Google Scholar
    • Zietsma, C., & Lawrence, T. B. 2010. Institutional work in the transformation of an organizational field: The interplay of boundary work and practice work. Administrative Science Quarterly, 55: 189–221. Google Scholar
    • Zimmerman, B. 2011. How complexity science is transforming healthcare. In P. AllenS. MaguireB. McKelvey (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of complexity and management: 617–635. London, U.K.: SAGE Publications. Google Scholar
    • Zimmerman, B., Lindberg, C., & Plsek, P. E. 1998. Edgeware: Insights from complexity science for health care leaders. Washington, DC: Plexus Institute. Google Scholar
    Academy of Management
      Academy of Management
      555 Pleasantville Road, Suite N200
      Briarcliff Manor, NY 10510-8020, USA
      Phone: +1 (914) 326-1800
      Fax: +1 (914) 326-1900
    © 2023 Academy of Management
    Powered by Atypon® Literatum