Good quick response to any of the my query. Looks good quality and the expert reads the case and provided a proper response instead of rushing despite needed it after 5 hours of asking for help. Instructions were followed correctly, the assignment is prepared correctly too! Cool.

Watts, R.B. (2012). “The new normalcy: Sea power and contingency operations in the twenty-first century,” Naval War College Review, ISSN 0028-1484, 65(3): 47-64. Wheatley, M.J. (2006). Leadership and the New Science: Discovering Order in a Chaotic World, ISBN 1576753441. Williams, W. and Lewis, D. (2008). “Strategic management tools and public sector management,” Public Management Review, ISSN 1471-9037, 10: 653-671. Wolf-Branigin, M. (2009). “Applying complexity and emergence in social work education,” Social Work Education, ISSN 0261-5479. 28(2): 115-127. 102016_2Exploring US Coast Guard organizational preparedness through chaos and complexity theories.pdf

Duit, A. and Galaz, V. (2008). “Governance and complexity: Emerging issues for governance theory,” Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions, ISSN 0952-1895, 21: 311-335. Durlauf, S.N. (2012). “Complexity, economics, and public policy,” Politics, Philosophy & Economics, ISSN 1470-594X, 11(1): 45-75. Fairholm, M.R. and Card, M. (2009). “Perspectives of strategic thinking: From controlling chaos to embracing it,” Journal of Management & Organization, ISSN 1833-3672, 15(1): 17-30. Fawcett, S.E. and Waller, M.A. (2011). “Making sense out of chaos: Why theory is relevant to supply chain research,” Journal of Business Logistics, ISSN 2158-1592, 32: 1-5. Gleick, J. (2008). Chaos: Making a New Science, ISBN 0143113453. Goldstein, J.A. (2009). “Chaos and complexity, branches and trees, and the advantages of vague concepts,” Emergence: Complexity & Organization, ISSN 1532-7000, 11(1): 6-10. Guastello, S.J. (2008). “Chaos and conflict: Recognizing patterns,” Emergence: Complexity & Organization, ISSN 1532-7000, 10(4): 1-9.

References Allio, M.K. (2008). “Strategic databanks: Design for success,” Journal of Business Strategy, ISSN 0275-6668, 29(1): 13-24. Boulton, J. (2010). “Complexity theory and implications for policy development,” Emergence: Complexity & Organization, ISSN 1532-7000, 12(2): 31-40. Bovaird, T. (2008). “Emergent strategic management and planning mechanisms in complex adaptive systems,” Public Management Review, ISSN 1471-9037, 10: 319-340. Butler, M.J., and Allen, P.M. (2008). “Understanding policy implementation processes as self-organizing systems,” Public Management Review, ISSN 1471-9037, 10: 421-440. Cvetek, S. (2008). “Applying chaos theory to lesson planning and delivery,” European Journal of Teacher Education, ISSN 0261-9768, 31: 247-256. Djavanshir, G.R. and Khorranmshahgol, R. (2006). “Applications of chaos theory for mitigating risks in telecommunication systems planning in global competitive market,” Journal of Global Competitiveness, ISSN 1059-5422, 14(1): 15-24.

Chaos theory and complexity theory are distinct theories with some overlap. Whereas chaos theory is a subset of complexity theory, the use of both theories in a synthesized approach to strategic management and public policy in turbulent external environment holds promise. Chaos theory generally suggests a limited degree of predictability through an understanding of the emergent patterns in the data. Complexity theory stresses that the interaction of all components of the system under study must be fully understood and appreciated to generate insight into the actions and reactions of the entire system. The synthesis of chaos theory and complexity theory into a comprehensive approach to the business environment was undertaken in this study. Table 1 lists the general constructs of chaos and complexity theories identified from the literature and of particular interest to the study. Table 1: Constructs of chaos and complexity theories Attributes Non-linearity Self-organization/local interaction Sensitivity to initial conditions Emergence Noise Unpredictability Disequilibrium/chaotic shock Constraints/boundedness

Complexity theory is increasingly being adopted as a way to better understand the management of complex and turbulent operating environments (Mason, 2009). Traditional, bureaucratic, and mechanistic management approaches are often suitable for stable environments, but are not effective in turbulent conditions where planning cycles are much shorter (Mason, 2009). Complexity theory can be used to explain the impact of improbable events on and the behavior of a variety of systems to include internal organizational systems and the organization’s external business or operating environment (Gleick, 2008). Complexity theory has applicability across a number of disciplines and is widely held to have applicability to both social and natural sciences (Kemp, 2009; Mitchell, 2009). The research integrated complexity theory into public policy and strategic management process of the Coast Guard. Improbable events have influenced the Coast Guard’s external environment in the past and are anticipated to continue in the future.

Chaos theory’s most useful attribute over more traditional linear forecasting models currently used in many strategic planning processes is the way chaos theory accounts for events that traditional models ignore as noise (Snell, 2009). The theoretical components of chaos theory can provide insight into actions or reactions in a business or policy context (Cvetek, 2008; Kayuni, 2010). Additionally, chaos theory’s practical usefulness in the business environment and other social sciences is not on specific details of a particular event or the ability to predict a specific event, but instead on the universal and shared emergent patterns in available data to provide practical insight involving future challenges in the existing environment (Sloan, 2011). Using chaos theory, relationships are no longer cause and effect, controlled, and no longer constant, instead organizational behaviors become non-linear and unanticipated (Nguyen & Kock, 2011).

Gleick (2008) suggested that where chaos begins, classical science often stops. Whereas classical science focuses on regularity and predictability, chaos theory focuses on irregularity and unpredictability (Gleick, 2008). However, chaos theorists focus on finding some order in the apparent disorder that is not well defined by classical science (Gleick, 2008). Chaos theory is a holistic approach to understanding phenomena that are not easily described or predicted using traditional and compartmentalized sciences that may overlook some factors contributing to the system’s behavior (Gleick, 2008). Chaos theory is a theoretical framework that provides an alternative model to forecasting than more traditional business forecasting models based on history, linearity, predictability, and controllability (Djavanshir & Khorramshahgol, 2006). Chaos has three distinctive features: non-repeating sequences, boundedness of the observed variable, and sensitivity to initial conditions (Gleick, 2008). Chaos theory also accounts for seemingly unrelated variables that are not directly connected to an observed phenomenon yet provide strong influences on the resultant observation (Snell, 2009).

Complexity theory is not a unified theory with a single, widely accepted standard definition. However, complexity theory is used to describe the actions and interactions of complex systems through an appreciation and understanding of the entire components of the system. Sensitivity to initial conditions, non-linearity, and self-organization are important components of complexity theory (Mitchell, 2009). Public policy is the internal decision making process in a government organization (Morcol, 2010). Strategic management is the tracking of emerging situations in the external environment and synthesizing an organizational response (Bovaird, 2008). Chaos and complexity theories include an emphasis on analysis of seemingly unpredictable events, randomness, and sensitivity to initial conditions in order to generate potential predictors of future needs and capabilities (Gleick, 2008; Mitchell, 2009; Rensicow & Page, 2008).

Purpose The purpose of this descriptive qualitative case study was to explore and generate a new holistic model that can inform the Coast Guard’s strategic management and public policy processes to improve the organization’s preparedness for unpredictable events. The constructs of chaos and complexity theories provided valuable insight in the development and integration of the new theory to improve organizational preparedness. Theoretical framework The concepts and principles of chaos theory provide a rich paradigm where researchers can examine the conditions and operating environment of an organization (Sloan, 2011). Chaos theory offers a very promising paradigm for exploration and imagination when researching how organizations evolve and operate in their external environment (Sloan, 2011). However, the interdependence of the entire system under study cannot be ignored (Gleick, 2008). Chaos theory is a separate component of the larger theoretical framework of complexity theory (Goldstein, 2009; Kayuni, 2010).

The inability to develop strategy to anticipate sudden changes in the external operating environment can have grave consequences for any organization (Allio, 2008; Bovaird, 2008; Poister, 2010). Chaos and complexity theories offer new insight for Coast Guard leaders to confront unpredictability in the external environment and enable organizations to anticipate and strategically plan for future challenges (Gleick, 2008; Meek, 2010; Mitchell, 2009). For the Coast Guard, anticipating future challenges was only part of the solution; internal organizational processes like public policy must also be similarly prepared and aligned (Meek, 2010). Leveraging and integrating chaos and complexity theory into a more holistic approach to include strategic planning and public policy specifically may become an entirely new approach to public administration and provide Coast Guard leaders with opportunities to better confront challenges in the external environment and to increase organizational preparedness (Boulton, 2010; Butler & Allen, 2008; Fairholm & Card, 2009; Haynes, 2008; Klijn, 2008; Teisman & Klijn, 2008).

The central research questions were if the themes that emerged from interview transcripts and organizational document related to strategic management and public policy were consistent with concepts and constructs from chaos and complexity theories; and, if those theories could be integrated in a new approach to public policy and strategic management to improve the Coast Guard’s preparedness for unpredictable events. This paper is organized into three main parts. The first part includes the problem statement, the purpose of the study, and the theoretical framework from chaos and complexity theories. The middle part includes an outline of the research method and the findings. The final part includes implications, recommendations, and conclusions. Problem statement The Coast Guard has not been prepared for several unpredictable events that created national crises and exposed organizational shortcomings using existing strategic management and public policy processes (U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 2009; Watts, 2012).

Instead, new theoretical approaches should be assessed for applicability to Coast Guard needs and challenges. Given the extreme unpredictability of crises occurring and the variability of the type of crisis that the Coast Guard is often called upon to handle (e.g. oil spills, shipwrecks, terrorism attacks, etc.) constructs related to chaos and complexity theory appear to offer advantages in a new approach to strategy and public policy development that may benefit the Coast Guard by reducing the surprise factor of events in the external environment. A qualitative case study approach was used combining interview data and analysis of Coast Guard strategic management and public policy documents. A case study was used to allow theory to emerge from the analysis of Coast Guard strategic management and public policy processes. The study explored and generated a new approach using a unique and rich integration of chaos and complexity theories into the Coast Guard’s strategic management and public policy processes to help Coast Guard leaders better prepare their organization for future events.

The underlying idea of complexity theory is that all interactions tend to self-organize into local systems where the behavior of the system is full of apparent surprises yet remains essentially orderly and potentially predictable (Mason, 2009). Seemingly improbable and unpredicted events that have created national crises include the Exxon Valdez oil spill in 1989, September 11th, 2001, Hurricane Katrina in 2005, and Super Storm Sandy in 2012, among others (U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 2009; Watts, 2012). The U.S. Coast Guard was on the front lines in response to each of these unpredicted and unexpected national crises (U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 2009). With past events as an indicator, Coast Guard organizational leaders will need to continue to prepare for and react to seemingly improbable events in an operating environment that appears to have characteristics aligned with chaos and complexity theories (Guastello, 2008; U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 2009; Watts, 2012). The Coast Guard should no longer accept the status quo and the prospect of unexpected events creating organizational surprise and national crisis.

The implications of the developed approach highlight the relevance of chaos and complexity theories in the understanding of the external environment and improved inter and intra-organizational processes related to strategic management and public policy for the Coast Guard. Introduction Chaos theory and complexity theory are complementary and when used together may offer a new and comprehensive perspective to understand the dynamics of organizations and the processes of change and organizational evolution (Goldstein, 2009; Hodge & Coronado, 2007). Chaos theory can be used to show that seemingly random events can be predicted through causal relationships within a structure of relatively predictable behavior (Gleick, 2008; Guastello, 2008; Haynes, 2007). Complexity theory suggests that the local interaction of the components of a defined system will result in patterns of interaction producing unexpected behavior of the overall system (Mason & Staude, 2009).

Exploring U.S. Coast Guard organizational preparedness through chaos and complexity theories December 30, 2014 · Research Article Print Article Citation PDF, XML Email Author Dr. Gregory Sanial Abstract The purpose of this qualitative case study was to explore and generate a holistic approach using chaos and complexity theories that captured the Coast Guard’s strategic management and public policy processes to improve the organization’s preparedness for unpredictable events. The case study included rich interviews of strategic management and public policy staff members and reviews of existing Coast Guard policy and procedural documents related to strategy and public policy. The research findings identified several themes in the data that were consistent with chaos and complexity theories. The identified themes were linked through the lenses of chaos and complexity theories to develop a holistic approach to improve Coast Guard organizational preparedness.