Author
Abstract
Purpose - The ability for an organisation to adapt and respond to external pressures is a beneficial activity towards optimising efficiency and increasing the likelihood of achieving set goals. It can also be suggested that this very ability to adapt to one's surroundings is one of the key factors of resilience. The nature of dynamically responding to sudden change and then to return to a state that is efficient may be termed as possessing the characteristic of plasticity. Uses of agent-based systems in assisting in organisational processes may have a hand in facilitating an organisations' plasticity, and computational modelling has often been used to try and predict both agent and human behaviour. Such models also promise the ability to examine the dynamics of organisational plasticity through the direct manipulation of key factors. This paper discusses the use of such models in application to organisational plasticity and in particular the relevance to human behaviour and perception of agent-based modelling. The uses of analogies for explaining organisational plasticity is also discussed, with particular discussion around the use of modelling. When the authors consider the means by which the authors can adopt theories to explain this type of behaviour, models tend to focus on aspects of predictability. This in turn loses a degree of realism when we consider the complex nature of human behaviour, and more so that of human–agent behaviour. Design/methodology/approach - The methodology and approach used for this paper is reflected in the review of the literature and research. Findings - The use of human–agent behaviour models in organisational plasticity is discussed in this paper. Originality/value - The originality of this paper is based on the importance of considering the human–agent-based models. When compared to agent-based model approaches, analogy is used as a narrative in this paper.
Suggested Citation
Dale Richards, 2020.
"Organisational plasticity: can we really model human–agent behaviours?,"
Evidence-based HRM, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 9(2), pages 181-191, April.
Handle:
RePEc:eme:ebhrmp:ebhrm-09-2019-0090
DOI: 10.1108/EBHRM-09-2019-0090
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:ebhrmp:ebhrm-09-2019-0090. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.