The article demonstrates the connection between organisational cybernetics and evolutionary theories in viable systems, highlighting implications for mixed methods research.
This article aims to establish a process epistemology for social systems in general, and viable systems in particular, based on evolutionary adaptive dynamics. It explores the compatibility of evolutionary processes with organisational cybernetics, based on Beer's determination of the intersection between evolutionary theories and VSM. The article explores various theories of the evolutionary process found in the literature about viable systems and living systems seeking to understand their underlying dynamics. The study employs an enhanced theoretical synthesis combined with the cybernetic modelling used by Beer in Platform for Change, integrating multiple evolutionary theories into a coherent metatheoretical framework. A cooperative managerial vignette demonstrates practical applicability of the proposed framework. Key findings emphasise symbiosis, autopoiesis and natural drift as essential for organisational evolution. The research underscores collaborative relationships and the self‐produced, self‐maintained nature of systems. The cybernetic modelling technique offers a means of illustrating evolutionary processes. Nine adaptive dynamics are categorised and proposed for systematic analysis of organisational systems. This study shifts the focus towards dynamic evolutionary perspectives within organisational cybernetics, broadening the academic understanding of evolution beyond natural selection. The findings have significant implications for future theoretical and empirical studies that emphasise mixed methods and process approaches. Future research should examine organisational evolution empirically, focusing on types of symbiosis and formulating an evolutionary theory based on autopoiesis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Camilo Osejo‐Bucheli (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: