Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Do the Modern Neurosciences Call for a New Model of Organizational Cognition?

  • Published:
Science & Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Our purpose in this paper is to try to make a significant contribution to the analysis of cognitive capabilities of the organization of active social systems such as the business enterprise by re-examining the concepts of organizational intelligence, organizational memory and organizational learning in light of the findings of modern neuroscience. In fact, in this paper we propose that neuroscience shows that sociocognitivity is for real. In other words, cognition, in the broad sense, is not exclusive to living organisms: Certain kinds of social organizations (e.g. the enterprise) possess elementary cognitive capabilities by virtue of their structure and their functions. The classical theory of organizational cognition is the theory of Artificial Intelligence. We submit that this approach has proven to be false and barren, and that a materialist emergentist neuroscientific approach, in the tradition of Mario Bunge (2003, 2006), leads to a far more fruitful viewpoint, both for theory development and for eventual factual verification. Our proposals for sociocognitivity are based on findings in three areas of modern neuroscience and biopsychology: (1) The theory of intelligence and of intelligent systems; (2) The neurological theory of memory as distributed, hierarchical neuronal systems; (3) The theory of cognitive action in general and of learning in particular. We submit that findings in every one of these areas are applicable to the social organization.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Argote, L. (1999). Organizational learning: Creating, retaining and transferring knowledge. Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Argyris, C. (1982). Reasoning, learning and action. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Argyris, C. (1997). On organizational learning. Malden, MA.: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1974). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arrow, K. (1962). The economic implications of learning by doing. Review of Economic Studies, 29, 166–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baum, J. (2002). The Blackwell companion to organizations. London: Blackwell Timothy Rowley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumard, P. (1996). Organisation déconcertée: La gestion stratégique de la connaissance. Paris: Masson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beer, S. (1972). The brain of the firm: The managerial cybernetics of organization. London: Allen Lane the Penguin Press.

  • Bood, R. P. (1998). Charting organizational learning: A comparison of multiple mapping techniques. In C. Eden & J.-C. Spender (Eds.), Managerial and organizational cognition. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boulding, K. (1968). The image: Knowledge and life in society. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bouvier, A. (2004). Management et sciences cognitives. Paris: Presses université de France.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bratman, M. E. (1987). Intention, plans and practical reason. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bullock, T. H. (2005). The neuron doctrine, redux. Science, 310(4), 54–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bunge, M. (1977a). General systems and holism. General Systems, 22, 87–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunge, M. (1977b). The GST challenge to the classical philosophies of science. International Journal of General Systems, 4, 329–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bunge, M. (1977c). Emergence and the mind. Neuroscience, 2, 501–509.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bunge, M. (1979a). Treatise on basic philosophy, Vol. 3, ontology I: A world of systems. Doredecht, Holland: D. Reidel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunge, M. (1979b). Treatise on basic philosophy, Vol. 4, ontology II: A world of systems. Doredecht: D. Reidel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunge, M. (1979c). A systems concept of society: Beyond individulaism and holism. Theory and Decision, 10, 13–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bunge, M. (1980). The mind-body problem. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunge, M. (1983a). Treatise in basic philosophy, Vol. 5, epistemology and methodology I: Exploring the world. Dordecht, Holland: D. Reidel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunge, M. (1983b). Treatise in basic philosophy, Vol. 6, epistemology and methodology II: Understanding the world. Dordecht, Holland: D. Reidel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunge, M. (2000). Systemism: The alternative to individualism and holism. Journal of Socio-Economics, 29, 147–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bunge, M. (2003). Emergence and convergence: Qualitative noverlty and the unity of knowledge. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunge, M. (2006). Chasing reality: Strife over realism. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunge, M., & Ardila, R. (1987). Philosophy of psychology. New York, NY: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94(Supplement), S95–S120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cossette, P. (2004). L’Organisation: Une Perspective Cognitiviste. Quebec, QC: Presses de l’Université Laval.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daft, R. L., & Weick, K. E. (1984). Towards a model of organizations as interpretive systems. Academy of Management Review, 9, 284–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dodgson, M. (1993). Organizational learning: A review of the literature. Organization Studies, 14(3), 375–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edelman, G. E. (1982). Group selection and phasic reentrant signaling: A theory of higher brain function. In G. E. Edelman & V. Mountcastle, (Eds.), The mindful brain: Cortical organization and the group-selective theory of higher brain function. Cambridge, MA.

  • Engel, A., Debener, S., & Krazciach, C. (2006). Coming to attention: How the brain decides what to focus conscious attention on. Scientific American Mind, 17(4), 46–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fields, R. D. (2006). Beyond the neuron doctrine. Scientific American Mind, 17(1), 21–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiol, C. M., & Lyles, M. A. (1985). Organizational learning. Academy of Management Review, 10(4), 803–813.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garnham, A., & Oakhill, J. (1994). Thinking and reasoning. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grueter, T. (2006). Picture this: How does the brain create images in our minds? Scientific American Mind, 17(1), 18–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gureckis, T. M., & Goldstone, R. L. (2006). Thinking in groups. Pragmatics & Cognition, 14(2), 293–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins, J. (2004). On intelligence. New York, NY: Henry Holt & Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins, J., & Dileep, G. (2006). Hierarchical temporary memory: Concepts, theory and terminology. Menlo Park, Ca: Numenta, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hebb, D. O. (1949). The organization of behavior. New York, NY: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hedberg, B. (1981). How organizations learn and unlearn. In P. C. Nystrom & W. H. Stabuck (Eds.), Handbook of organizational design (Vol. 1, pp. 3–27). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, D. H. (1993). The link between individual and organizational learning. Sloan Management Review, 35(1), 37–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klimecki, R., & Lassleben, H. (1998). Modes of organizational learning: Indications from an empirical study. Management Learning, 29(4), 405–430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kosslyn, S. M. (1996). Image and the brain. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krippendorff, K. (2008). Social organizations as reconstitutable networks of conversation. Cybernetics and Human Knowing, 15(3–4), 149–161.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levitt, B., & March, J. G. (1988). Organizational learning. Annual Review of Sociology, (14), 319–340.

  • Lindenberger, U., Li, S.-C., Gruber, W., & Müller, V. (2009). Brains swinging in concert: Cortical phase synchronization while playing guitar, BMC Neuroscience, 10(22).

  • March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1975). The uncertainty of the past: Organizational learning under ambiguity. European Journal of Politcal Research, 3, 147–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • March, J. G., & Simon, H. A. (1958). Organizations. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayr, E. (1982). The growth of biological thought: Diversity, evolution and inheritance. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCulloch, W. S., & Pitts, W. H. (1943). A logical calculus if the ideas immanent in nervous activity. The Bulletin of Mathematical Biophysics, 5, 133–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moessinger, P. (1991). Les Fondements de L’Organisation. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moessinger, P. (2008). Voir la Société: Le micro et le Macro. Paris: Hermann Éditeurs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mountcastle, V. (1982). An organizing principle for cerebral function: The unit module and the distributed system. In G. E. Edelman & V. Mountcastle (Eds.), The mindful brain: Cortical organization and the group-selective theory of higher brain function. Cambridge, MA.

  • Nonaka, I. (1991). The knowledge creating company. [Reprint 91608]. Harvard Business Review.

  • Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science, 5(1), 14–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka, I., von Krogh, G., & Voelpel, S. (2006). Organizational knowledge creation theory: Evolutionary paths and future advances. Organization Science, 27(8), 1179–1208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pylyshyn, Z. (2003). Return of the mental image: Are there really pictures in the brain? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(3), 113–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramòn y Cajal, S. (1995). Histology of the nervous system of man and vertebrates. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosen, R. (1974). Planning, management, policies and strategies; four fuzzy concepts. International Journal of General Systems, 1(4), 245–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosen, R. (1985). Anticipatory systems; philosophical, mathematical, and methodological foundations. Oxford: Pergamon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosen, J., & Kineman, J. J. (2005). Anticipatory systems and time: A new look at Rosennean complexity. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 22, 399–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, R. W. (1987). Organizations: Rational, natural and open systems. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Searle, J. (1983). Intentionality: An essay in the philosophy of mind. Cambridge: U.K. Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Searle, J. (1994). The rediscovery of the mind. Boston: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Searle, J. (1995a). The mystery of consciousness: Part I. New York Review of Books, 52(17), 60–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Searle, J. (1995b). The mystery of consciousness: Part II. New York Review of Books, 52(18), 54–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seni, D. A. (1990). The sociotechnology of sociotechnical systems: Elements of a theory of plans. In P. Weingartner & G. Dorn (Eds.), Studies on Mario Bunge’s Treatise (pp. 431–454). Amsterdam: Rodopi Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seni, D. A. (2009). Capacités coopératives et capacités collaboratives des organisations: Une esquisse. 5 ième Colloque sur le Management des Capacités Organisationnelles, Actes du 77e Congrès de l’Association Canadienne-Française pour l’Avancement des Sciences (ACFAS), mai 2009, Université d’Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.

  • Seni, D. A. (2010). “La coordination dans les organisations : Une approche axiomatique”, 6 ième Colloque sur le Management des Capacités Organisationnelles, Actes du 78e Congrès de l’Association Canadienne-Française pour l’Avancement des Sciences (ACFAS), May 2010, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Canada.

  • Séville, M. G. (1996). La mémoire des organizations. Paris: Hartmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spender, J.-C. (1996). Making knowledge the basis of a dynamic theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(Winter special issue), 1–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spender, J.-C., & Eden, C. (Eds.). (1998). Managerial and organizational cognition: Theory, methods and research. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.

  • Tomasello, M. (2009). Why we cooperate. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomasello, M. (2010). Origins of human communication. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsoukas, H. (2005). Organizations as knowledge systems: A brief overview. In H. Tsoukas (Ed.), The firm as a distributed knowledge system: A constructivist approach (pp. 97–101). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Krogh, G., & Roos, J. (1995). Organizational epistemology. Vhps Distribution.

  • Weick, K. E., & Roberts, K. H. (1993). Collective mind in organizations: heedful in interrelating on flight decks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 357–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E., & Westley, F. (1996). Organizational learning: affirming an oxymoron. In S. R. Clegg, C. Hardy, & W. R. Nord (Eds.), Handbook of organizational studies (pp. 440–459). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, A. P. O. (2001). A belief-focused process model of organizational learning. Journal of Management Studies, 38(1), 67–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dan Alexander Seni.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Seni, D.A. Do the Modern Neurosciences Call for a New Model of Organizational Cognition?. Sci & Educ 21, 1485–1506 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-011-9385-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-011-9385-9

Keywords

Navigation