Affiliations: [a] Kedge Management School, Marseille, France | [b] School of Civil Engineering, Huaqiao University, Xiamen Fujian, People Republic of China | [c] School of Management and Economics, Wuhan University, Wuhan Hubei, People Republic of China | [d] Systems Thinking, Business School, University of Hull, Hull, UK
Correspondence:
[**]
Corresponding author, Chinese: Meng Li, School of Civil Engineering, Huaqiao University, Xiamen Fujian, 361021, People Republic of China. Tel.: +86 13400739067, E-mail: mli@hqu.edu.cn.
Abstract: A review of some of the 35 + studies applying Kauffman's NK model to an administrative context unquestioningly presume that groupthink predominates—a misrepresentation of reality in many firms. Groupthink results from strong ties (contacts); novelty and entrepreneurship results from weak ties. The biological basis of the NK model leads to groupthink. But employees don't usually behave like genes. Recent findings in the strong-tie/weak-tie literature are presented, leading up to the notion of a tipping point. But, how many weak-ties does a firm need before its overall behavior tips from groupthink to innovation? The NK model is changed in just one way so that it produces results showing the transition from strong- to weak-tie situations. The one change introduces F, the number of contacts per year; it varies from once a week to once a year. How “weak” do ties have to become before novelty effects result? Our results clearly show that the “F” variable negates the standard NK effect of emergent “complexity catastrophe,” which is a dramatic loss of overall fitness. And, yes, there is a tipping point.
