Article Review on the Chaos, Complexity, and Contingency

Theories: A Comparative Analysis and Application to the 21 st

Century Organization by Franklin M. Lartey

This paper presents the review and analysis of the results of the study
conducted by the aforementioned authors in relation to the utilization of
Chaos, Complexity and Contingency Theories.

Purpose
Organizations in the 21st century face constant changes that
challenging them. Based from the in-depth analysis of the study, the
author conducted a study to present and enlighten scholars and
organizational leaders with the two theories namely Chaos Theory and
Complexity Theory comparatively to the Contingency theory in a way that
would make it easy for them to understand and apply it for
organizational or research purposes.
Changes are inevitable in all facets of society, including
organizations. With constant changes such as technological evolutions
and globalization that afecting organizations and their environments,
theories need to be adapted to address emerging challenges and interpret
the impact of the changes on organizations.

Theoretical Argument
The article adhered to the principles of comparative research. It
follows that the author presented, contrasted, and compared the theories
to help interpret and explain the impact of the changes on organizations.
The study aims to provide scholars and organizational leaders with a
foundation for understanding the continual transformation that the 21 st
century has brought forth.
It may be deduced that organizational practices and tactics are
the dependent variables of this study while the independent variable is
the evolution of organizational theories over time. The main goal of the
study’s assessment of the variables was to determine how essential the
variables were and how to apply the theory to beneft organizations.
 This study assumes that researchers and organizational leaders
will consider the advantages and limitations of these theories before
implementation.
The study also tested the hypothesis. Whether or not, a certain
change will soon be just nothing for organizations because of the
signifcant connection between Chaos Theory, Complexity Theory, and
Contingency Theory.

Methodology
It is apparent that the study is an example of comparative
research. Comparative research involves the use of comparison to
develop fundamental theories with signifcant generality and relevance
( Brandon University).
The author then frst presented the problem, suggested a solution which
are the Chaos, Complexity and Contingency Theories. And to better
understand the use and how to apply them, the author presented their
foundations and characteristics by comparing and contrasting their key
concepts using a block approach combined with the point-to-point
method.
The statistics were acquired using the information that was
readily available from documents and records pertaining to the
organizational theories.

Findings and Contributions

The study reported new insights about the challenges that can
be viewed and addressed through the lenses of contemporary theories.
The purpose of the study is to analyze various organizational ideas to
increase management efectiveness. Future management instructions are
thus provided by the overview of these ideas and the applicability of the
notions.
Based on the fndings of the article at hand, it was determined
that comprehension of the existing state of the environment is the main
factor to be taken into account when choosing organizational theories in
management. This is therefore a comprehension of the theories and how
we apply them.
Critic: Problems, Limitations, and Future Extensions
After reviewing the article, the following theoretical and
empirical problems, limitations, and future extensions are deduced:

1. The statistics were acquired using the information that was readily
available from documents and records pertaining to the
organizational theories. When acquiring data in this manner, there
is a high possibility that an article won’t be well-written and
understandable because it seems like the author itself do not have
enough knowledge to support his study.

2. In addition, It is apparent that the theoretical underpinnings of

this study are already obsolete since situations vary from time to
time. According to Smart (2022), the age of references in research
should not be older than 5 years old unless otherwise stated like in
historical or phenomenological research. In the organization
industry, the trend is dynamic, and problems difer from one
generation to another.

3. On the other hand, the study’s theoretical and conceptual

frameworks are likewise ambiguous. Instead of addressing
important issues like “what are the frameworks of the study?”
“How will the information be handled?” the author concentrated on
defning and contrasting various organizational theories.

4. Despite all of the issues with the article’s formal standards, it still
has the ability to provide explanations of the topic. As was
previously said, the major goal of this study is to assess the
various organizational theories and then produce reports.

5. I sincerely applaud the author’s idea for conducting this study, but
the result does not encompass or resolve all of the issues raised.

References
Article Review on A Journey of Organization Theories: From Classical to
Modern by Jannatul Ferdous
Article Review on the Balanced Scorecard, Competitive Strategy,
And Performance by Eric M. Olson and Stanley F. Slayer
Smart, J. 2022. How old sources for references and literature review
should be. Retrieved on November 28, 2022 from
https://essaylot.com/how-old-sources-references/Brandon University
https://www.brandonu.ca ›