autopoietic system


An autopoietic system is organized (defined as a unity) as a network of processes of production (transformation and destruction) of components that produces the components that:
  1. through their interactions and transformations continuously regenerate and realize the network of processes (relations) that produced them; and
  2. constitute it (the machine) as a concrete unity in the space in which they [the components] exist by specifying the topological domain of its realization as such a network.
(Varela, 1979, p. 13)
Reference: Dr. Randall Whitaker: http://
www.informatik.umu.se/~rwhit/AT.html

Other definitions of autopoiesis:

  1. the process whereby an organization produces itself. An autopoietic organization is an autonomous and self-maintaining unity which contains component-producing processes. The components, through their interaction, generate recursively the same network of processes which produced them. An autopoietic system is operationally closed and structurally state determined with no apparent inputs and outputs. A cell, an organism, and perhaps a corporation are examples of autopoietic systems. See ALLOPOIESIS. (F. Varela)

also
  1. Literally, self-production. The property of SYSTEMs whose components (1) participate recursively in the same NETWORK of productions that produced them, and (2) realize the NETWORK of productions as a UNITY in the space in which the components exist (after Varela) (see RECURSION). Autopoiesis is a process whereby a system produces its own ORGANIZATION and maintains and constitutes itself in a space. E.g., a biological cell, a living organism and to some extend a corporation and a society as a WHOLE. (Krippendorff)


Dr. Randall Whitaker states:
Autopoietic theory provides a rigorous theoretical basis for addressing people and the social systems in which they participate. Because the theory proceeds from formal specifications on systemic unities, its tenets can conceivably be applied to both. Owing to the extent of Maturana and Varela's expansion of the core concepts to describe a phenomenology of living systems, the theory's scope is relatively broad. This permits researchers to apply its principles across a broader range of subject phenomena than is the case for other current approaches. Because it is rooted in a formal analysis of living systems and cognition, the theory can support research focusing on individual subjects and their activities within an enterprise (e.g., workflow analyses, human factors / HCI analyses of specific information system users). Because the theory includes an explanation for linguistic interaction, it can support research focusing on enterprise social interactions and communications (e.g., ethnographic studies; qualitative research).

Having completed this overview, it should be clearer to you how autopoietic theory intrinsically supports attention to the three themes in today's enterprise research innovations: systemic perspective, auto-determination, and contextualization. The first occurs by definition, the second by focus, and the third by the manner in which Maturana and Varela lay out the phenomenological aspects of the theory.

Maturana and Varela coined the term autopoiesis to characterize those systems which (a) maintain their defining organization throughout a history of environmental perturbation and structural change and (b) regenerate their components in the course of their operation. Autopoietic systems realized in the physical space are living systems. Varela later defined a broader concept of autonomy, of which autopoiesis is a special case. Autonomous systems maintain their organization, but do not necessarily regenerate their own components. .
     TOP of Page