Loose Coupling

Conceptual Overview

The loosely coupled systems perspective emphasizes the evolution of organizational forms and organizational strategies from simplistic monolithic firms to complex adaptive systems (see Complex Organizations). In organizational theory, this can be seen in the movement during the 20th century from tightly coupled firms to moderately coupled [Page 834]bureaucracies to loosely coupled networks. In strategic management, this can be seen in the movement from business strategies to corporate strategies to network strategies. As noted by Baum in 2002, there are currently 10 clusters of theories in organization and strategy that are built around 10 specific “motors” or explanations: economics, technology, power, institutions, learning, cognition, ecology, evolution, networks, and complexity. All 10 of these theoretical approaches have captured a movement from presumptions of organizations as tightly coupled firms to presumptions of organizations as loosely coupled networks.

The loosely coupled system perspective is a product of the Herbert Simon agenda to shift attention away from organizations as things toward organizations as arenas in which complex processes take place. Research in the Simon-March-Weick tradition on strategy making, decision making, and sensemaking processes required a reformulation of organizations from monolithic, tightly coupled firms toward chaotic, loosely coupled networks. The loosely coupled systems perspective has facilitated the development of theories of change, culture formation, organizational identity formation, strategy making, decision making, organizational learning, knowledge creation, new product design, and innovation.

Critical Commentary and Future Directions

Orton and Weick described loose coupling as a “linguistic Trojan horse” that served to pry researchers away from simplistic assumptions of organizations as rational, monolithic, predictable actors and to move researchers toward more complex models of organizations. The horse has been rather tame lately because the concept of loose coupling (1) continues to be simplified into merely a sexy synonym for decentralization, (2) is disconnected from the larger and more important theoretical project of understanding equivocality-reduction processes in organizations, and (3) gravitates toward horizontal and vertical loose coupling rather than procedural loose coupling.