Organising for social-ecological resilience : lessons from self-organised groups in Cape Town, South Africa
| dc.contributor.advisor | Feront, Cecile | en_ZA |
| dc.contributor.author | Doyle, Jeremy | en_ZA |
| dc.contributor.other | Stellenbosch University. Faculty of Economic and Management Sciences. Centre for Sustainability Transition. | en_ZA |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2024-02-27T16:35:01Z | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2024-04-26T14:44:23Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2024-02-27T16:35:01Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2024-04-26T14:44:23Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2024-03 | |
| dc.description | Thesis (MPhil)--Stellenbosch University, 2024. | en_ZA |
| dc.description.abstract | ENGLISH SUMMARY: How can we organise ourselves to better address “wicked” systems problems? Despite increased awareness of the planetary crisis and recognition that organisations need to embrace approaches consistent with social-ecological systems (SES), it remains unclear what this means in practice. Communities who take matters into their own hands to tackle local issues show promise as a type of emergent, organisational assemblage that follows a different set of rules. The self-organising and emergent nature of these groups may hold practical lessons for those who are struggling to translate SES thinking into meaningful strategies and actions. However, what we know about organisational assemblage remains highly abstract, with little insights from empirical research. To gain insights into ways of organising to tackle systems problems, my study investigates the organising principles and practices displayed by local, self-organising groups working on systems problems, such as water security, urban decay, or social segregation in Cape Town. To conduct my investigation, I adopt a grounded theory approach. Using a combination of semi-structured interviews and participant observations, I gather data from fifteen participants and five different groups. I find that people working together on local systems problems have little concern for organisational forms. Groups exhibit circumstantial organising, with highly diverse organisational approaches and structures. Groups paradoxically display both collective motivations showing alignment on the problem to be solved, and personal motivations producing a diversity of ideas, plans and strategies. Groups display ambiguous boundaries, continually scaling, shrinking, or seeding new initiatives, and easily disbanding or re-forming. In addition to these group characteristics, two individual practices appear to hold groups together: valuing relationships, and associative action. Importantly, the “organisations” that emerge from these efforts appear as by-products of temporarily overlapping motivations rather than being shaped by structures. These organisational assemblages are made up of collections of many different intentions (ideas, plans, and strategies), relationships, and actions. Thus, my study suggests that people working on systems problems value intentions over entity, and that groups are held together by the individual practices of valuing relationships with others and associative action at points of alignment. My research contributes to our understanding of how we can organise to address systems problems. First, I contribute to organisational theory in the context of SES by showing that organisations working on systems problems are better conceptualised as sense-making mechanisms rather than intermediaries through which system goals can be reached. Second, I argue that organisations working on systems problems are constituted of assemblages of intentions, relationships, and actions, thereby providing a more granular interpretation of event clustering. Third, I argue that aspects of organisational assemblages can be valuable to explain the dynamics and fluctuating nature of the roles of people working on systems problems. I term role assemblage the temporary configuration of intentions, relationships, and actions that direct how individuals work on systems problems. My findings suggest that leaders, managers, and entrepreneurs who adopt an SES approach should encourage alignment on the understanding of systemic problems rather than on specific solutions, allowing organisational assemblages to emerge and coalesce around individual and collective interests. My research also suggests that those working on systems problems in informal organisational settings should exercise caution when establishing or enforcing formal processes, metrics, or indicators, as they may reproduce mechanistic outcomes and stifle emergent cooperation. | en_ZA |
| dc.description.abstract | AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Hoe kan ons onsself beter organiseer om "goddelose" stelselprobleme aan te spreek? Ten spyte van verhoogde bewustheid van die planetere krisis en erkenning dat organisasies benaderings wat ooreenstem met sosiaal-ekologiese stelsels (SES) moet aanvaar, is dit onduidelik wat dit in die praktyk beteken. Gemeenskappe wat self plaaslike kwessies aanpak, toon belofte as 'n tipe opkomende, organisatoriese samestelling wat 'n ander stel reels volg. Die selforganiserende en ontluikende aard van hierdie groepe kan praktiese lesse inhou vir diegene wat sukkel om SES-denke in betekenisvolle strategiee en aksies om te skakel. Wat ons egter van organisatoriese samestelling weet, bly hoogs abstrak, met min insigte uit empiriese navorsing. In ‘n poging om insig te verkry in maniere om stelselprobleme aan te pak, ondersoek my studie die organisatoriese beginsels en -praktyke wat deur plaaslike, selforganiserende groepe wat aan stelselprobleme werk, soos wateronsekerheid, stedelike verval of sosiale segregasie in Kaapstad, vertoon word. Om my ondersoek uit te voer, volg ek 'n gefundeerde teorie-benadering. Deur 'n kombinasie van semi-gestruktureerde onderhoude en deelnemerwaarnemings te gebruik, versamel ek data van vyftien deelnemers en vyf verskillende groepe. Ek vind dat mense wat saamwerk aan plaaslike stelselprobleme, minder geneig was om bekommerd te wees oor organisatoriese vorms. Groepe vertoon omstandigheidsorganisering met hoogs diverse organisatoriese benaderings en strukture. Groepe vertoon beide kollektiewe motiverings wat ooreenstem met die probleem wat opgelos moet word, asook persoonlike motiverings wat 'n diversiteit van idees, planne en strategiee voortbring. Die groepe toon ook dubbelsinnige grense, groei voortdurend, krimp of begin met nuwe inisiatiewe, en ontbind maklik of hervorm. Benewens hierdie groepeienskappe blyk dit dat twee individuele praktyke groepe bymekaar hou: verhoudings wat waardeer word en assosiatiewe aksie. Wat belangrik is, is dat die "organisasies" wat uit hierdie pogings voortspruit, verskyn as neweprodukte van tydelik oorvleuelende motiverings eerder as om deur strukture gevorm te word. Hierdie organisatoriese samestellings bestaan uit versamelings van baie verskillende bedoelings (idees, planne en strategiee), verhoudings en aksies. My studie dui dus daarop dat mense wat aan stelselprobleme werk, intensies bo entiteit waardeer, en dat groepe bymekaar gehou word deur die individuele praktyke om verhoudings met ander te waardeer en assosiatiewe aksie by belyningspunte. My navorsing dra by tot ons begrip van hoe ons kan organiseer om stelselprobleme aan te spreek. Eerstens dra ek by tot organisatoriese teorie in die konteks van SES deur te wys dat organisasies wat aan stelselprobleme werk, beter gekonseptualiseer word as singewende meganismes eerder as tussengangers waardeur stelseldoelwitte bereik kan word. Tweedens, argumenteer ek dat organisasies wat aan stelselprobleme werk, saamgestel is uit samestellings van bedoelings, verhoudings en aksies, en daardeur 'n meer gedetaileerde interpretasie van gebeurtenisgroepering kan gee. Derdens argumenteer ek dat aspekte van organisatoriese samestellings waardevol kan wees om die dinamika en wisselende aard van die rolle van mense wat aan stelselprobleme werk, te verduidelik. Ek noem rolsamestelling die tydelike konfigurasie van bedoelings, verhoudings en aksies wat bepaal hoe individue aan stelselprobleme werk. My bevindinge dui daarop dat leiers, bestuurders en entrepreneurs wat 'n SES-benadering aanneem, belyning moet aanmoedig oor die begrip van sistemiese probleme eerder as op spesifieke oplossings, sodat organisatoriese samestellings kan ontstaan en saamsmelt rondom individuele en kollektiewe belange. My navorsing dui ook daarop dat diegene wat aan stelselprobleme in informele organisasie-omgewings werk, versigtig moet wees wanneer formele prosesse, maatstawwe of aanwysers daargestel of toegepas word, aangesien dit meganiese uitkomste kan weergee en ontluikende samewerking kan smoor. | af_ZA |
| dc.description.version | Masters | |
| dc.format.extent | xii, 101 pages : illustrations, includes annexures | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://scholar.sun.ac.za/handle/10019.1/130359 | |
| dc.language.iso | en_ZA | en_ZA |
| dc.publisher | Stellenbosch : Stellenbosch University | |
| dc.rights.holder | Stellenbosch University | |
| dc.subject.lcsh | Resilience (Ecology) -- Cape Town (South Africa) | en_ZA |
| dc.subject.lcsh | Social ecology -- Cape Town (South Africa) | en_ZA |
| dc.subject.lcsh | Organizational resilience -- Cape Town (South Africa) | en_ZA |
| dc.subject.name | UCTD | |
| dc.title | Organising for social-ecological resilience : lessons from self-organised groups in Cape Town, South Africa | en_ZA |
| dc.type | Thesis | en_ZA |
Files
Original bundle
1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
- Name:
- doyle_organising_2024.pdf
- Size:
- 1.9 MB
- Format:
- Adobe Portable Document Format
- Description: