Good afternoon Doc and to my classmates.

Today I am going to report to you about

Darwinian Legacy. The Evolutionary Approach in the Study of Organization. I am Reynan
M. Gayramon your discussant for today.

But before I proceed to my topic allow me first to present to you a picture and help me
identify what is presented on the screen? _______________ Let me check if you answer
if your answers are correct? Yes, it presented the Evolution of Man. Next picture,
____________________ Let me check, yes it Charles Robert Darwin a 73 year old
English Naturalist who advocated the law of nature, a Geologist, and Biologist. He is
known as the Father of Evolution. In my discussion, I will not be talking about the evolution
of man but rather how his Philosophy interacts with the study of organization.

I have a personal question for my classmates, Can you share with the class about your
personal philosophy in life? Please write it in the chat box. ______________ Reading in
the chatbox……. I have also here some examples reading the slides. Why am I asking
your personal philosophy? This is to level our understanding that you may or may not
agree with me that our Philosophies are products of our experiences and how we interact
with the environment we live in. The same is true with Charles Robert Darwin, his
philosophies were anchored to his experiences being an advocate to nature, being a
geologist, and a biologist. His grandfather Erasmus and father Robert Darwin were
renowned people and that wanted him to become a doctor of medicine. But he shifted to
another course in which he loved most being a naturalist. Being a Geologist and Biologist
was a perfect combination.

Darwin’s evolution theory marked the concept of Survival of the Fittest.

There are 3 Mainstream Theories of Evolution that are the focus of today’s discussion.
The Darwinian Concept, Probability Model, and the Complexity Approach. The
mainstreams are overlapping. Each theory goes a step beyond the previous one but
remains complementary to it. The structure that is created by the three approaches
produces a workable framework for the analysis of change and transformation.

1. Darwinian Concept, we have the Natural Selection Theory it provides a reductionist

view of survival. The approach reflects a process where the players are helpless against
their fate and the weakest will be left by the wayside. This was the most important and
revolutionary part of Darwin’s theory in his time. Selection theory has appeal in explaining
the dynamics of competition in open market structures. It provides a framework for the
market without critically disrupting the prevailing paradigm of what constitutes an
organization since the selection occurs at the population level. In application to the
organization, it is the latter that decides whatever options they have at their table.
Example choosing manual labor over technological advancement to save jobs or adapt to
the new trends and lessen the workforce or better have mitigating actions. Organizational
selection is a process of displacement of older less well-adapted technologies or strategic
memes by newer forms.
 Organizational change, it is important to understand that speed of change does not
reflect the magnitude of change. The speed of change represents only one variable in
organizational change, and that one variable may not be significant for transformation. On
one side of the spectrum, we look at evolutionary or incremental change, which refers to a
slow, systematic course of action. Darwinism subscribes to this idea of a slow build-up of
change. At the other end, we look at revolutionary change, which usually refers to the
suddenness of the change. Whether revolutionary and evolutionary changes lead to
transformation depends on the time continuum of observation. The magnitude of change
or transformation is measured in terms of depth and impact on culture. If there is a
significant change of culture that contributes to achieving the organizational goals and
objectives then we are successful.

Evolutionary theory in organizational studies is a tool for generating perspective, but not
a measuring instrument of change. Darwin’s Theory referred to a gradual steady rate of
change in species, which brought about evolution. The concept of evolution of the human
species from primates caused considerable controversy, at a time when the notion of
human supremacy was prevalent. The survival of the fittest was introduced as the man
wanted to achieve things that need strategic actions so as organizations. However, the
most common application of survival dynamics is found in economics, where survival
theories are used to analyze how firms thrive and compete in industries. The theory of
‘survival of the fittest is insufficient to deal with change and transformation in
organizations. The survival model cannot be used to analyze firms’ transformation
processes such as reengineering or to explain the dynamics of knowledge management
and its proliferation.

Darwinism vs. Neo-Darwinism. Darwinism is the theory of biological evolution postulated

by the English naturalist Charles Darwin (1809–1882) and others. It states that all species
develop through the natural selection of favorable phenotypic variations that are
inheritable. Thus, this increases the individual’s ability to compete, survive, and reproduce.
Neo Darwinism is a modified interpretation of Darwinian evolution in association
with Mendelian genetics and modern synthesis of natural selection. Therefore, it describes
the major driving force of speciation as the accumulation of genotypic variations within a
gene pool. Some also refer to Neo Darwinism as the Modern synthetic theory of natural
selection.

2. Probability Model

Probability theories refer to change that occurs through chance rather than through
planning. The body of knowledge on evolution addresses other change dynamics, such as
the dependence on preceding events; the unpredictability of outcomes; the clustering of
change events in nature; and the role of isolated groups as the common sources of
change. The concept of punctuated equilibrium is the most widespread application of
probability theory in the social sciences. Through punctuated equilibrium, long periods of
small incremental change are interrupted by brief periods of discontinuous, radical
change.

Business Executives cannot escape the need to make strategic decisions in the face of
uncertainty and the study of this process has long been at the forefront of management
science. We maintain that these tools do present a huge opportunity for managers in all
industry sectors facing significant uncertainty, provided that they are used and interpreted
appropriately. Probabilistic modeling is any form of modeling that utilizes presumed
probability distributions of certain input assumptions to calculate the implied probability
distribution for chosen output metrics.

There are two main approaches: the objectivist, or frequentist, approach, and the
subjectivist approach. Decision-makers need to understand how the two approaches
differ, and which approach is being used in any specific instance because otherwise, the
conclusions drawn can be quite misleading.

The objectivist-frequentist approach views probability as the proportion of occasions in

an observable sequence of random events in which the event occurs. The probability of a
dice rolling a 6, for example, is 1 in 6. This view is tied in most closely with statistical
analysis and inference and needs the least explanation. The subjectivist interpretation,
on the other hand, sees probability as the degree of personal belief that a certain event
will happen. This applies even to inherently unrepeatable events – the probability that
global warming will drive the human race to extinction, for instance.

In subjective interpretation, probability depends on the perceiver’s experiences and

assumptions. Suppose a trusted friend assures us that the new acquaintance we are
about to meet is a nice person. In fact, the new acquaintance behaves unkindly at the first
meeting.

We still generally give this person more leeway than if we had no prior information from
our friend or did not trust the friend as much. Nevertheless, if the poor behavior continues,
we will increasingly put more trust in our observations and less on the prior information.
The mathematics of this process is called Bayesian estimation, where a prior estimate of
probability (the assurance from our trusted friend) is adjusted based on observations (poor
behavior toward us) to obtain a more refined posterior estimate (our changing opinion of
the boor). This type of analysis does not make sense in the context of an objectivist-
frequentist view of probability, which would hold that probability is what it is – without ifs,
and, or buts.
 In this example, the only way to turn the subjectivist concept of probability into an
objectivist one would be to translate the information from the trusted friend into an
equivalent number of prior observations: “I’m sure my friend has interacted with this
person at least 4 times and I have only once, so he appears to be boorish at most 20% of
the time; but if he’s boorish to me the next 3 times as well, then it will be 50/50.” While not
absurd, this is just not how we usually think through such an issue. Recent work in
behavioral economics has shown that Bayesian estimation actually describes quite well
how humans make estimates under uncertainty, with some, but incomplete, prior
information. Mathematically, Bayesian estimation has been used productively in such
disparate areas as predicting which oil fields might be economical and which e-mails
should be blocked by a spam filter.

The single most important benefit of probabilistic analysis is that it offers the opportunity to
engage managers in a meaningful conversation about their risks.

3. Complexity Approach

Complexity theory sheds light on the processes of co-operation, adaptation and outcomes
as factors that create change and transformation. With the increase in attention that is
given to complex systems, a fresh perspective is emerging to explain findings about
organizational phenomena. Complexity research is not at the point of describing an
underlying theory of organization. However, it can provide a powerful descriptive tool for
understanding the world around us. It will change the way managers think about the
problems they face. Instead of competing in a game or a war, they are trying to find their
way on an ever changing.

Punctuated equilibrium

Describes a view of evolution where there are extended phases of consistency

intermittently disrupted by short surges of new life forms. Punctuated equilibrium model
provides a useful viewpoint for understanding complex systems, such as organizations.

For the purpose of our discussion, it is vital to delineate the difference between
complicated systems and complex systems. A complicated systems, such as a thesaurus,
is rich in detail. A complex system, such as a multinational organization, is rich in
structure. Managers are used to dealing with problems that are complicated and require
attention to detail. Getting the task done is the primary objective, whether they are running
a department, an IT system or a multinational company. Problems are broken down into
constituent parts. Experts are engaged to solve each part within a management hierarchy.
This method fails when it is applied to problems that are complex, such as managing the
growth of a fast-moving technology company. The rules keep shifting with changes in
corporate and economic environments, and the organization keeps reorganizing itself to
handle such shifts. An action on one part of the problem affects the behaviour of another
part.

Self-Organizing Systems

An example of a self-organizing system is a flock of birds flying in formation. The

formation is formed by the subconscious rules followed by each bird, such as maintaining
a fixed distance from its neighbour. The boids, or birds, are given three simple rules: to
maintain a minimum distance from other objects in the vicinity, to match their velocity to
that of neighbours and to move towards the perceived centre of the group. The implication
for organizations is considerable. A complex adaptive system starts with simple rules and
goals for the individual, which create an organized complex formation. The end result is a
configuration that seems to have its own life, which is capable of moving in harmony
without a leader or external

control.

Continuous Adaptation

Can be seen in the stock market, where investors collect and analyse information and
react to it. This is a spiralling feedback loop of modifying behaviour to the situation of other
components in the environment. The resultant behaviour will modify the environment and
vice versa. The analogy in ecosystems is that fast lions lead to faster gazelles, which
would lead to even faster lions. The faster gazelles will survive to pass on their genes, and
only faster lions would be able to prey on them and survive. complex adaptive systems as
continually adjusting their structure in reaction to feedback from their environment.

The Death of Competition

Urges businesses to adopt an ecosystem model. The feedback loop in co-evolution is

toward more complexity. There is also the possibility of a decline in diversity, as can be
seen with the extinction of several species and the proliferation of mankind. It is not,
however, correct to view the direction of evolution towards higher and fitter species. The
fitness component is more related to adaptation to the environment than it is related to
superior performance. When environments are competitive and aggressive from the start-
up phase, cooperation emerges between the parties for the benefit of all. This type of
evolution of co-operation is seen in the mobile telecommunication industry, where
companies have to co-operate to set standards and widen their networks by allowing
access to each other’s systems.

The prisoner’s dilemma gets its name from a hypothetical situation where two criminals
are arrested. The police have insufficient information and try to turn each prisoner into an
informant by telling each one that the other has confessed. The ‘dilemma’ faced by the
prisoners here is that, whatever the other does, each is better off confessing than
remaining silent. But the outcome obtained when both confess is worse for each than the
outcome they would have obtained had both remained silent. A common view is that the
puzzle illustrates a conflict between individual and group rationality. The absence of a
leader or an ‘invisible hand’ in complex systems means we need a Darwinism, probability
and complexity: market-based organizational transformation and change explained
through the theories of evolution more comprehensive understanding of the
interrelationships and interdependencies in networks and hierarchies (Battram 1999).
Networks need hierarchies and hierarchies would require networks. The requirement for
network stems from the benefits derived from co-operation.