Under this theoretical framework, the firm is designed as complex social system able to
process information and realise choices, constituted by sub-systems and autonomous
individuals in interaction, open to other autonomous systems (territorial, functional,
institutional).
Before going any further, we deem important to emphasise that this perspective admits that
there is conflict within social systems, due to the fact that conflict is beyond anyone’s control
whenever we are dealing with individuals or organisations that have their own goals and make
their own choices. It seems that we are tackling with a characteristic which permits us to
fundament the distinction between social systems and natural systems (Ackoff and
Gharajedaghi, 1996).
Having into account the above mentioned definition, the firm’s relation with the environment
(other systems) might be understood as a structural articulation: the firm lives on its opening
to the exterior, submitting itself to inevitable external disturbances; however, it closes itself to
the external influence, in order to survive through the selection of compatible disturbances.
Under these circumstances, it attempts to respond by promoting changes in its internal
components and relations (changes within the structure) so as to preserve its identity
(maintenance of the organisation). This process of simultaneous opening and enclosure is
sustained by internal networks which support circular relationships among the parts and the
whole system (irreducible to the parts) whilst ensuring the permanence of the system.
Therefore, as long as the firm is understood as a complex system, its articulation with the
environment is crucial for its survival (Conti and Dematteis, 1995).
The utilisation of a complex system’s approach in the analysis of socio-economic systems
suggests some necessary assumptions (cf. Paulré, 1997:143-146):
• Learning is a characteristic of open social systems. However, to allow the
emergence of learning, the system must have a memory to register situations; on
the other hand, it must have assessment criteria which allow for comparing
outcomes and make options;
• Feedback mechanisms are necessary to assimilate innovations. As for the
disturbing behaviours of the equilibrium of the system, or that they get it away
from its path, they can either be strengthened/amplified by positive feedback or
limited/eliminated by negative feedback. The existence of a memory in the system,
combined with these feedback effects, explains either the assimilation or the
elimination of innovations within the system.