1
Imagining a Complex Adaptive System: A Multi-State Transportation Collaborative
Perry D. Gross
Atkins
Abstract: The Interstate 80 (I-80) Corridor System Master Plan (CSMP) study is bringing
diverse stakeholders from across California, Nevada, Utah, and Wyoming together for an
in-depth dialogue. The ultimate goal of the study is to generate a system that continues
advocating for the I-80 corridor communities beyond the study period and the support of
the consultant team. This essay explores the experiences of applying complex adaptive
system (CAS) properties adopted by the consulting team to support the diversity,
interdependence, and authentic dialogue (DIAD) theory of collaborative processes.
Specifically, achieving the goal of a perpetuating governance system lies in the potential
of generating the dynamics of a CAS among the diverse study stakeholders or agents.
Using the properties of CAS as a guide, the consultant support team organized virtual
conversation meant to introduce a sense of complexity, such as beginning with an
economic analysis and livability principles. Agents cope with the complexity using
dialogic tools advanced by collaborative practitioners. Ultimately, by using CAS
properties as a guide for the ongoing dialogue, it is hoped that a CAS emerges that can
adapt and evolve over time. This approach is informed by the theoretical work of Judith
Innes and David Booher as compiled in Planning with Complexity: An Introduction to
Collaborative Rationality for Public Policy (Routlegde, 2010).
Given the ongoing nature of the I-80 CSMP study dialogue, I would value guidance with
regard to the following elements:


What quantitative tools could be used to assess the level to which the study
stakeholders are emulating a CAS?
What strategies will integrate this information back into the ongoing study in order to
enhance the potentiality of achieving the properties of a CAS and an enduring process
among the stakeholders?
Introduction
This essay describes the ongoing purposeful process of infusing complex adaptive
systems properties in guiding the organization and execution of a multistate
transportation collaborative. Essentially, this essay is a status report. Initially, the essay
describes the diversity, interdependence, and authentic dialogue (DIAD) (CCP, 2013)
theory-based planning framework. Innes and Booher’s (1999a, 2010) integration of
complex adaptive systems (CAS) with DIAD theory of collaborative processes dynamics
provide an explanation of success. The essay then describes the typical consultant
contracting environment for state departments of transportation influenced by both DIAD
theory of collaborative processes and CAS properties. Once contextualized, the nature of
social interaction when coping with linear and nonlinear worldviews is described. This
discussion is followed by an accounting of the ongoing study organized around CAS
properties within the multistate collaborative framework. This includes observations
2
concerning emerging collaborative dynamics and the existence of CAS properties within
the collaborative group. The essay concludes with thoughts on further enhancing the
infusion of CAS properties into the I-80 CSMP study process.
DIAD Theory and CAS
The following is adapted from Gross (2012) and briefly summarizes the salient
aspects of the relationship between DIAD theory of collaborative processes and CAS.
Booher and Innes (2002) introduced the DIAD theory of collaborative processes as a way
of explaining collaborative planning network dynamics. Booher and Innes were both
collaborative practitioners and employed phenomenological and interpretive case studies
based on their experiences and others’ experiences in developing their theory. DIAD
theory is both a descriptive and a normative theory of collaborative processes. Figure 1
shows the relationship between the theoretical elements of diversity, interdependence,
and authentic dialogue. Booher and Innes (2002) emphasized that participants in DIAD
theory pf collaborative processes are not "selfless altruists" but rather driven by "selfinterest and rational choice" (p. 227). It is from this position of self-interest that the three
elements of the DIAD theory of collaborative processes are believed to generate
beneficial system dynamics.
As illustrated in Figure 1, each participant in a collaborative process acts as an
independent agent representing individual diverse interests (Innes & Booher, 1999a
2010). Diversity introduces the complete spectrum of perspectives about the issues being
dealt with. Essentially, diversity provides the building blocks for potential innovation
(Innes & Booher, 1999a). As Innes and Booher (2003a, 2004, 2005; see also Booher &
Innes, 2002) identified, leaving contrarian, often difficult and typically unrepresented and
unorganized, perspectives from the process undermines legitimacy. Further, without the
full range of diversity there is little chance local or interpretive knowledge can be
balanced against professional expert bureaucratic knowledge (Innes & Booher, 2000,
2004, 2005; Booher & Innes, 2002; Yanow, 2009). Without a diversity of perspectives,
authentic dialogue has little chance of achieving emancipatory rationality (Habermas as
cited by Booher & Innes, 2002, p. 228). Including all perspectives about issues of interest
generates the potential for beneficial deliberative dynamics.
Participants in a collaborative process must have both an interest of gaining
something and possessing something of interest to others, an interdependence (Booher &
Innes, 2002, p. 229). Again, as Booher and Innes (2002) pointed out, collaborative
participants need self-interest in the process and operate under the premise of rational
choice. Empirical research on reciprocity and cooperation based on rational choice and
game theory established the existence of this dynamic. Specifically, this research
suggests that repeated collective action based on self-interest benefits all parties (Booher
& Innes, 2002; Innes, Connick, & Booher, 2007). Individual self-interest provides the
impetus for engagement.
Capitalizing on the diversity and interdependence of participants in a
collaborative process relies on trying to achieve conditions of authentic dialogue among
participants. Booher and Innes (2002) argued that generating a dialogue that allows
participants to speak openly about their perceptions and interests while other participants
listen openly leads to opportunities for shared understanding, reciprocity, actionable
3
information, and creativity. Generating collaborative process dynamics relies on the open
atmosphere of authentic dialogue. Booher and Innes (2002) identified four conditions for
authentic dialogue: (a) "participants speak with sincerity, accuracy, comprehensibility,
and legitimacy" and "they can evaluate each others' statements in these terms"; (b)
participants "must be fully and equally informed about the issues and the problems" and
often engage in joint fact-finding in order to "assess their own interest and accuracy of
other statements"; (c) participants must be able to comprehend each other which often
calls for engaging in storytelling and sense making; and (d) participants must have
legitimacy for saying what they say and the ability to demonstrate their legitimacy when
challenged (p. 230). Further, Booher and Innes (2002) acknowledged that achieving
authentic dialogue typically required skilled facilitation that allows participants to learn
to listen and generate the deliberative norms required for dialogue.
Characteristics
of Participants
Results of Authentic
Dialogue
Adaptations of
the System
Diversity of
Interests
Interdependence
of Interests
Reciprocity
Relationships
Learning
Creativity
Shared Identities
Shared Meanings
New Heuristics
Innovation
Figure 1. Relationships between diversity, interdependence, and authentic dialogue in the
DIAD theory of collaborative processes. Adapted from the Center for Collaborative
Policy at http://www.csus.edu/ccp/collaborative/diad.stm in 2013.
Referring again to Figure 1, achieving authentic dialogue generates reciprocity,
relationships, learning, and creativity. Shared identities and meanings, new heuristics,
and innovation arise from combining diversity, interdependence, and authentic dialogue.
Interestingly, earlier work by Innes and Booher (1999a) argued that the complexity of
process and outcome dynamics of collaborative processes resembled CASs. Ultimately,
the DIAD theory of collaborative processes provides a normative practitioner framework
for understanding complex group dynamics.
4
Context
Recent federal transportation policy and enabling legislation have targeted
planning resources and initiatives for multistate corridor planning, principally the
interstate system. These efforts are in response to early successes experienced on the
Interstate 95 corridor along the east coast during the 1990s. Often these initiatives take on
an operational perspective targeting enhance coordination across state and local
jurisdictions particularly in the event of severe weather events. Based on the initial
success of an Interstate 15 multistate corridor study, the Nevada Department of
Transportation (NDOT) published a request for proposals (RFP) to undertake an
Interstate 80 corridor system master plan multistate study. The RFP provided a broad
scope that invited creative proposals for conducting the multistate study. Our response
was to organize a study around the DIAD theory of collaborative processes and
properties of CAS in order to potentially accomplish a principal aim of the study. NDOT
desired the emergence of an ongoing working partnership among the corridor
stakeholders. The other principal aim of the study was to generate a consensus supported
list of corridor significant programs, projects, and initiatives for stakeholders to mutually
advocate for discretionary funding.
The approach we developed for the proposal advocated for three interrelated
strategies. These strategies aimed to promote the environment for the potential emergence
of critical network and collaborative governance elements identified by theorists.
Foundationally, Hammond & Sanders, (2002) point to the complexity of communication
as the potential nexus for the “life giving and system building” energy for selforganization (p. 10). Morçöl (2005) adds that undertaking complex dialogic exposes
participants to phenomenological perspectives for generation of knowledge. This
exposure “disturbs the Newtonian/positivist belief in the universality and objectivity of
scientific knowledge” (p. 15). Challenging global dialogue perturbs local established
institutions. In this state, local institutions potentially experience what Meek (2008)
identified as a “system-wide effect” leading to “locally driven metropolitan system
adaptations” such as “the creation of intermediate (third-party) structures” (p. 416).
Koliba and Zia (2009) recognize the need for self-organizing governance networks, or
third-party structure to explore their legitimacy as democratic governments accountably
for providing public goods and services. Hibbert & Huxhan’s (2010) caution about the
effects of the temporal components of organizations and institutions, in the form of
traditions should be accommodated throughout the process. Likely underpinning the
entire process is what Ansell and Gash (2008) identified as the practicality of generation
of trust principally through “small wins” (p. 543). In a sense, ultimately the effort roughly
approximates Giddens’ (1984) restructuration of existing social, intellectual, and political
relationships to enhance governance accountability through collaboration.
These fundamental theoretical perspectives were integrated into the proposal
strategies in the following manner. The first strategy was to introduce a geographic
information system (GIS)-based platform for compiling existing information for
consideration by corridor stakeholders. This provided the group with the means to access
high-quality information and collectively validated for any potential decision-making
processes. The second similar strategy was to advocate for developing a web-based
working environment to support collaborative dialogues undertaken and provide a
5
common location for study resources. The third strategy advanced the need for multiple,
scalable, and adaptable forums for stakeholder dialogue. The proposal described the
rationale for relationships between these study strategies. However, less attention was
paid to the typical rigorous requirements for a detailed schedule, study milestones, and
deliverables. Specifically, these three strategies were organized to facilitate authentic
dialogue of DIAD theory of collaborative process. Arguably these three study elements
could provide for Habermas’ (1984) ideal speech conditions: legitimacy, sincerity,
veracity, and comprehensibility. Additional proposal strategies targeted broad stakeholder
recruitment, for diversity and a focus on Sustainable Communities
(http://www.sustainablecommunities.gov/aboutUs.html#2) six livability principles, for
interdependence. The six livability principles provide comprehensive concepts that cross
traditional planning domains forcing the consideration of interdependencies.
Coping with Complexity in a Linear Paradigm
This discussion focuses on the linguistic shift that occurred among the study’s
leadership teams through the contract negotiation, study startup, and initial stakeholder
engagements. These linguistic shifts demonstrate the viability of CAS language as an
organizing metaphor. Our basis for this linguistic shift lies in Axelrod’s (1984; 1997)
foundational demonstration that cooperation is the natural state for social interaction over
time. This realization provides the chink in the armor of what Yanow (2009) labels “the
language of certainty” (p. 579).Thomson, Perry, & Miller (2009) further demonstrate
through a statistical model that the collaboration mutuality, cooperation dimension may
be on par with the dimensions of governance, administration, autonomy, and trust norms.
This implies the need to be linguistically consistent across all elements of the study
process. Yanow (2009) further identifies linguistics as the center of a reflective practice
focusing on the “language of inquiry” (p. 579). Finally, Chettiparamb (2006) connects the
use of metaphors, specifically CAS metaphors as the nexus for theory transfer throughout
the study process. The practical application of this linguistic approach emerged with an
emphasis on study process, the value of potentially conflicting perspectives, organizing
groups based on their topical dialogue, and emphasizing the uncertainty of potential
outcomes among others.
Introducing CAS Properties into a Collaborative Planning Process
Chettiparamb (2006) concluded that CAS theory, in the form of metaphors
enhances planning practice. Innes and Booher’s (1999a; 2010) collaborative practitioner
perspectives and theories on planning with complexity support and amplify these
conclusions. The CAS properties of agents, interactions, nonlinearity, system behavior,
robustness, and adaptation are introduced through the practical theories, models, and
techniques used by collaborative practitioners. Straus (2002) provides a experiential
framework for generating collaborative processes. Kaner, Lind, Toldi, Fisk, & Berger,
(2007) provide additional practice-based perspectives including a wide-range of ideas for
facilitating conversations. Doyle & Straus (1982) provide practical, practice-based
guidance for effective meetings for diverse attendees. Finally, Fisher, Ury, & Patton
(1991) provide a framework for engaging in interest-based negotiations that assists
6
collaborative participants in recognizing their interest instead of focusing on their stated
positions. This opens the space for mutual gains solutions. Other practitioner resources
are incorporated situationally to accommodate emerging group dynamics. The following
discussion assesses CAS properties as they are introduced and integrated into I-80 CSMP
study based on the DIAD theory of collaborative processes.
Agents
Agents represent individual actors within the system connected to multiple
networks (Innes & Booher, 2010). In this collaborative dialogue, agents are comprised of
individual representatives for the different parties involved with the study. Plowman, et al
(2007) as well as Boal and Schultz (2007) provide a salient representation for the role the
consultants are taking in the collaborative process. Specifically, we operate as enablers
that “disrupt existing patterns of behavior, encourage novelty, and make sense of
emerging events for others” (Plaowman, et al, 2007, p. 341). This approach is similar to
Yanow’s (2009) language of inquiry. All other parties, agents in the I-80 CSMP study
engaging in collaborative dialogues operating independently. Further, they are
encouraged to represent both personal and organizational perspectives across multiple
dialogues. Individual agents engage at multiple scales within the study such as in working
groups and task forces explained below.
Interactions
Innes and Booher (2010) explain interaction as the dynamic exchanging of
information between agents through multiple local interactions thus allowing even small
group interactions to propagate through the system. Again, the quality of this information
exchange relies on Habermas’ (1984) ideal speech conditions of sincerity, veracity,
comprehensibility, and legitimacy. As Mennin (2007) argues, these interactions are the
basis for small-group problem-based learning. The collaborative process is organized
with large and small group processes. Large group processes are undertaken by the
Partner States, Planning, Technical, Implementation, and Joint Task Forces. These groups
interact through conference call presentations and feedback loops such as brief webbased surveys. The small group processes are undertaken in the form of 13 different
working group dialogues with topics such as alternative energy infrastructure, tourism,
freight and logistics, truck parking, and wildlife crossings. The specific topics emerged
from the initial dialogue of the task forces. Each working group is self-organizing with
the facilitation of a consultant chair and NDOT co-chair for establishing institutional
traditions. The results of working group dialogues will be presented to the various task
forces for broad consideration. It is expected that concepts from various working groups
will be refined into study initiatives at the task force level. With these interactions
propagating across the system, the collective distributed memory is expected to emerge
within the system. Ultimate the properties of a CAS are envisioned to emerge from these
extensive interactions.
Nonlinearity
The system generates multiple feedback loops, both direct and indirect. These
feedback loops produce iterative, nonlinear, and self-referential interactions (Innes &
Booher, 2010). I-80 stakeholders are engaged in formal and informal feedback
7
mechanisms including electronic surveying, email exchanges, and informal one-on-one
conversations. Working group dialogues are goal driven without prescriptive schedules or
deliverables. The intent with this approach is that the group’s collective sense-making
will invoke nonlinear thinking among group members while encouraging them to
recognize their “ah ha” moments. This approach to reflective practice is meant to
reinforce the need for self-organization and enhance the potential emergence of
innovations (Gross, 2012; Rhodes & Murray, 2007).
System behavior
Systems cannot be understood by observing component parts sense system
behavior is determined by interactions between components operating in an open
environment. Order coherence is understood at the system level to the degree a systems
boundaries are understood (Innes & Booher, 2010). Participating in this multistate
collaborative planning study is open to all individuals who legitimately represent a
corridor stakeholder broadly defined. Wagenaar’s (2007) study of community dynamics
using a CAS framework provides guidance on how to think about the relationship
between component part and the overall system. In particular, paying attention participant
interactions and contemplating strategies for harnessing the inherent complexity (p. 17).
Gross’ (2012) use of an interpretive framework comprised of CAS, dialogic, and
subjectivity theory provides potential for gaining insights to system dynamics.
Robustness and adaptation
A CAS has the ability to continue operating at the edge of chaos because of the
ability to evolve as agents adapt to each other and reorganize the system's internal
organization (Innes & Booher, 2010). Early indications for the I-80 corridor stakeholders
as they continue to organize their dialogues indicate these CAS properties may
potentially emerge. Just as with DIAD theory of collaborative process, these CAS
properties will likely only be identified in the future as the systems continues to emerge.
A Request for Intellectual Feedback
Early signs indicate positive potential for the purposeful process of infusing
complex adaptive systems properties into a multistate transportation collaborative as a
guiding organizational concept. This essay brief described the context and overall
framework for how CAS properties are considered in organizing the social interactions of
this DIAD theory-based collaborative process. The initial organizational efforts have
facilitated the experiential learning of the consulting team’s working group chair. This
learning includes the generation of a certain level of comfort with uncertainty and the
lack of a sense of control: both challenges for engineering and planning professions. The
process is currently accelerating the frequency and diversity of dialogic elements through
the 13 working groups and weekly update podcast. This effort would benefit greatly from
the collective intellect of the COMPACT community.
8
REFERENCES
Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal
of Public Administration Research & Theory, 18(4), 543-571. doi:
10.1093/jopart/mum032A
Axelrod, R. (1984). The evolution of cooperation. New York, NY: BasicBooks.
Axelrod, R. (1996). The complexity of cooperation: Agent-based models of competition
and collaboration. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Boal, K. B., & Schultz, P. L. (2007). Storytelling, time, and evolution: The role of
strategic leadership in complex adaptive systems. Leadership Quarterly, 18(4),
411-428. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2007.04.008
Booher, D. E., & Innes, J. E. (2002). Network power in collaborative planning. Journal
of Planning Education and Research, 21, 221-236. doi:
10.1177/0739456X0202100301
Booher, D. E., & Innes, J. E. (2010). Governance for resilience: CALFED as a complex
adaptive network for resource management. Ecology and Society, 15(3).
Retrieved from http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss3/art35/
Center for Collaborative Policy (CCP), (2013). DIAD network dynamics. Retrieved
January 10, 2009, from Center for Collaborative Policy
http://www.csus.edu/ccp/collaborative/diad.stm
Chettiparamb, A. (2006). Metaphors in complexity theory and planning. Planning
Theory, 5(1), 71-91. doi: 10.1177/1473095206061022
Doyle, M., & Straus, D. (1982). How to make meetings work: The new interaction
method. New York, NY: Jove Books.
Duit, A., & Galaz, V. (2008). Governance and complexity: Emerging issues for
governance theory. Governance: An International Journal of Policy,
Administration, and Institutions, 21(3), 311-335. doi: 10.1111/j.14680491.2008.00402.x
Fisher, R., Ury, W., & Patton, B. (1991). Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without
giving in. New York: Penguin Books.
Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration.
Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Gross, P. D. (2012). Perspectives of public decision making in light of collaboration: A q
methodology study. Lexington, KY: Lambert Academic Publishing.
9
Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action: Reason and the rationalization
of society (T. McCarthy, Trans. Vol. 1). Boston: Beacon.
Hammond, S. C., & Sanders, M. L. (2002). Dialogue as social self-organization: An
introduction. Emergence, 4(4), 7-24. Retrieved at
http://iscepublishing.com/ECO/about_eco.aspx
Hatch, M. J., & Yanow, D. (2008). Methodology by metaphor: Ways of seeing in
painting and research. Organizational Studies, 29, 23-44. doi:
10.1177/0170840607086635
Hibbert, P., & Huxhan, C. (2010). The past in play: Tradition in the structures of
collaboration. Organizational Studies, 31, 525-554. doi:
10.1177/0170840610372203
Innes, J. E., & Booher, D. E. (1999a). Consensus building and complex adaptive systems:
A framework for evaluating collaborative planning. Journal of the American
Planning Association, 65, 412-423. Retrieved from http://www.planning.org/japa/
Innes, J. E., & Booher, D. E. (1999b). Consensus building as role playing and bricolage:
Toward a theory of collaborative planning. Journal of the American Planning
Association, 65, 9-26.
Innes, J., & Booher, D. E. (2003a). Collaborative policy making: Governance through
dialogue. In M. Hajer & H. Wagenaar (Eds.), Deliberative Policy Analysis:
Governance in the Networked Society (pp. 33-59). Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Innes, J. E., & Booher, D. E. (2003b). The impact of collaborative planning on
governance capacity (Publication no. http://escholarship.org/uc/item/98k72547).
Retrieved November 8, 2007, from eScholarship
Innes, J. E., & Booher, D. E. (2004). Reframing public participation: Strategies for the
21st century. Planning Theory & Practice, 5(4), 419-436. doi:
10.1080/1464935042000293170
Innes, J. E., & Booher, D. E. (2005). Living in the house of our predecessors: The
demand for new institutions for public participation. Planning Theory & Practice,
6(4), 431-435. doi: 10.1080/14649350500209710
Innes, J. E., & Booher, D. E. (2010). Planning with Complexity: An introduction to
collaborative rationality for public policy. New York, NY: Routledge.
10
Innes, J. E., Booher, D. E., & Di Vittorio, S. (2011). Strategies for megaregion
governance. Journal of the American Planning Association, 77(1), 55-67. doi:
10.1080/01944363.2011.533640
Innes, J. E., Connick, S., & Booher, D. E. (2007). Informality as a planning strategy:
Collaborative water management in the CALFED Bay-Delta program. Journal of
the American Planning Association, 73(2), 195-210. Retrieved from
http://www.planning.org/japa/
Kaner, S., Lind, L., Toldi, C., Fisk, S., & Berger, D. (2007). Facilitator's guide to
participatory decision making. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Koliba, C., & Zia, A. (2009). Dispelling the myth of the invisible hand: An argument for
democratically legitimate interorganizational governance networks.
Administrative Theory & Praxis, 31, 417-423. doi: 10.2753/ATP10841806310311
McCubbins, M. D., Paturi, R., & Weller, N. (2009). Connected coordination: Network
structure and group coordination. American Politics Research, 37(5), 899-920.
doi: 10.1177/1532673x09337184
Meek, J. (2008). Adaptive intermediate structures and local sustainability advances.
Public Administration Quarterly, 32(3), 415. Retrieved from
http://www.spaef.com/article.php?id=807
Morçöl, G. (2005). Phenomenology of complexity theory and cognitive science:
Implications for developing en embodied knowledge of public administration and
policy. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 27, 1-23. Retrieved from
http://www.citeulike.org/user/rrbarb/article/2935422
Plowman, D. A., Solansky, S., Beck, T. E., Baker, L., Kulkarni, M., & Travis, D. V.
(2007). The role of leadership in emergent, self-organization. Leadership
Quarterly, 18(4), 341. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2007.04.004
Rhodes, M. L., & Murray, J. (2007). Collaborative decision making in urban
regeneration: A complex adaptive systems perspective. International Public
Management Journal, 10(1), 79-101. doi: 10.1080/10967490601185740
Straus, D. (2002). How to make collaboration work: Powerful ways to build consensus,
solve problems, and make decisions. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler
Publishers, Inc.
Thomson, Perry, & Miller. (2009). Conceptualizing and measuring collaboration. Journal
of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19(1), 23-56. doi:
10.1093/jopart/mum036
11
Uhl-Bien, M., Marion, R., & McKelvey, B. (2007). Complexity leadership theory:
Shifting leadership from the industrial age to the knowledge era. Leadership
Quarterly, 18(4), 298-318. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2007.04.002
Wagenaar, H. (2007). Governance, complexity, and democratic participation: How
citizens and public officials harness the complexities of neighborhood decline.
The American Review of Public Administration, 37(1), 17-50. doi:
10.1177/0275074006296208
Yanow, D. (2009). Ways of knowing: Passionate humility and reflective practice in
research and management. The American Review of Public Administration, 39,
579-601. doi: 10.1177/0275074009340049