Ameneh Deljoo and Marijn Janssen
PPSN are composed of a large number of agents and their relationships such that there’ s an inability to predict or understand casual relationships among them due to the number of relationships and their nonlinearity. Thus, a complex system can take a large number of states and possess characteristics that we call emergent in that these global characteristics cannot be directly derived from the individual elements and their relationships. PPSN are a relatively new phenomenon, there is little understanding of their evolution. PPSN, because of these interactions between the organizations in the network, may operate in a less stable and more dynamic environment like traffic jam, school of fish and flock and stock market. For instance the new policies for selling product or control the emergency situation in the healthcare system are kind of emergent phenomenon in the PPSN. This makes it difficult for policy‐makers to direct its evolvement.
In our definition of the PPSN we illustrate that each organizations in the network( private and public, nonprofit organizations) provides services to customers. In addition, organizations change and take new forms; they often do so through the creation and development of emergent aspect. Changing in the demand of the customer and changing in the structure of the network during time make system and relations more complex. In the public and private network when a new rules and system added to the system, all the system accepts the new member of network and adapts them to it. For this adaption, some rules and attributes are changed for instance in stock market when new product added to the system the new policy about how sell this product with the best profit.
5. Conclusion
We analyzed PPSN and CAS and we argued that CAS has the ability to exist and operate in a state between pure stability and complete instability in a region contains both. This paper has highlighted fruitful subjects( e. g. service quality) for further exploitation and exploration for CAS perspective in PPSN and offered a number of research opportunities and challenges such as nonlinearities in the network and adaptive property that may facilitate or hinder ongoing and future PPSN investigation efforts. The lack of understanding of PPSN, or viewing PPSN as mechanic without considering nonlinearities can easily lead to inappropriate hypothesizing and findings that are difficult to interpret in better network outcomes. In this paper we argue 5 properties of CAS( nonlinearity, aggregation, diversity flow and evolving) are use full for conceptualizing PPSN. We figure out that in the network of organization by considering the flow of information and different between goals of organizations( both commercial and non‐profit) systems are constantly changing during time so, CAS can help to adapt network to this modification.
We proposed the initial conceptualization of PPSN in which each organization; department or individual is modeled as an agent. Our future work will focus on understanding evolution of PPSN by conceptualizing them as CAS. Also, by using agent based modeling we find the model of CAS for understanding PPSN by using multiagent simulation. Agents will be used to model the behavior of each individual entity and the aggregate behavior of individuals can show the dynamic and emergent behavior over time. Once an ABM is created, various parameters can be manipulated and rules could be modified in order to study the emergent outcomes and to study the adoption of new developments. In this way the implications of design principles can be evaluated and used to modify the design principles.
References
Anderson, P. 1999. " Perspective: Complexity theory and organization science." Organization Science 10( 3): 216‐232. Axelrod, R. and M. D. Cohen. 2001. Harnessing complexity: Organizational implications of a scientific frontier: Free Press. Brass, D. J., J. Galaskiewicz, H. R. Greve and W. Tsai. 2004. " Taking stock of networks and organizations: A multilevel perspective." Academy of Management Journal Vol. 47( No. 6): pp. 795‐817. Brown, C. S. 2004. " Complex adaptive systems and organisational understanding in the Royal Australian Air Force." Chan, S. 2001. " Complex adaptive systems." Cambridge: MIT. Damper, R. I. 2000. " Editorial for the Special Issue on ' Emergent Properties of Complex Systems ': Emergence and levels of abstraction." International Journal of Systems Science Vol. 31( No. 7): pp. 811‐818. Dooley, K. 1996. " Complex Adaptive Systems: A Nominal Definition." Vol. 8( No. 1): pp. 2‐3. Dooley, K. J., S. R. Corman, R. D. McPhee and T. Kuhn. 2003. " Modeling high‐resolution broadband discourse in complex adaptive systems." Nonlinear Dynamics, Psychology, and Life Sciences 7( 1): 61‐85. Dooley, Kevin J. 1997. " A Complex Adaptive Systems Model of Organization Change." Nonlinear Dynamics, Psychology, and
Life Sciences Vol. 1( No. 1): pp. 69‐97. Drazin, R. and L. Sandelands. 1992. " Autogenesis: A perspective on the process of organizing." Organization Science
3( 2): 230‐249.
599