INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS IN THE VUCA WORLD: CHALLENGESAND ADAPTATION
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.29038/2524-2679-2024-03-45-58Keywords:
international relations, VUCA, volatility, uncertainty, complexity, ambiguity, global processes, security, international communications, information technologyAbstract
The article examines the impact of the VUCA concept (volatility, uncertainty, complexity, ambiguity) in the field of contemporary international relations. We analyze how these components affect global political and security processes, particularly in the post-Cold War world, where instability and unpredictability have increased. It is determined that traditional approaches to analyzing inter- national relations are becoming less effective due to the growing complexity of global processes, driven by the interdependence of states, rapid technological development, and the emergence of new threats.
Special attention is paid to the impact of modern information and communica- tion technologies, which enhance the influence of VUCA factors by complica- ting international interactions. Technological progress leads to rapid chang- es in the fields of politics and security, which, in turn, create new challenges for international actors. The article explores the problems associated with the adaptation of international actors to new conditions and the need to revise tra- ditional management models in the context of contemporary challenges.
Based on a systems approach, the interconnections between various political, economic, and social factors that complicate decision-making in international politics are analyzed. The role of international communications in amplifying the complexity and ambiguity of global processes is highlighted. The VUCA concept is an effective analytical tool for understanding contempo- rary international relations. Its application allows for a more accurate explana- tion of new challenges and promotes the development of new approaches to managing international processes in an increasingly unpredictable and com- plex environment.
References
1. Barber, H. F. (1992). Developing Strategic Leadership: The US Army War College Experience. Journal of Management Development, 11, no. 6, 4–12.
2. Szpitter, A., & Sadkowska, J. (2016). Using VUCA matrix for the assessment of project environment risk. Zarzadzanie i Finanse, vol. 14, no. 2/1, 401–413.
3. Bennett, N., & Lemoine, G. J. (2014). What a Difference a Word Makes: Under- standing Threats to Performance in a VUCA World. Business Horizons, 57(3), 311–317.
4. Bennett, N. and Lemoine, G. J. (2014). What VUCA really means for you. Harvard business review, 92, 1/2.
5. Mohd Aris, N. F., Omar, S. S. and Nashim, F. (2021). VUCA: Theories, Concepts, and its Remedy. Leading through the COVID-19 Crisis. Penerbit UTHM. URL: https://bit. ly/3X1Hnga.
6. Çiçeklioğlu, H. (2020). VUCA concept and leadership [E-book], Management and Strategy, pp. 229–244. Artikel Akademi. URL: https://bit.ly/3InNebt.
7. Sinha, D. and Sinha, S. (2020). Managing in a VUCA World: Possibilities and pit- falls. Journal of Technology Management for Growing Economies, 11;1, pp. 17–21, https:// doi.org/10.15415/jtmge.2020.111003.
8. Calvosa, M. and Franco, I. (2022). Descomplicando o VUCA (Volatility, Uncer- tainty, Complexity and Ambiguity). XLVI Encontro da ANPAD – EnANPAD, 2022. On-line 21–23 de set de 2022 2177–2576. URL: https://bit.ly/3Yr43b0.
9. Clegg, L. J., Voss, H. and Chen, L. (2019). Can VUCA Help Us Generate New Theory within International Business? Tulder, R. V., Verbeke, A. and Jankowska, B. (Ed.) International Business in a VUCA World: The Changing Role of States and Firms (Progress in International Business Research, vol. 14), Emerald Publishing Limited, Leeds, pp. 55–66. URL: https://doi.org/10.1108/S1745-886220190000014005
10. Fernández-Pérez de la Lastra, S., & Sánchez-Gardey, G. (2024). Organizational am- bidexterity: A reconceptualization and research agenda for the VUCA international context. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 32, e12565. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468- 5973.12565
11. Khalatur, S., Velychko, L., Pavlenko, J., Karamushka, J. and Huba, M. (2021). A model for analyzing the financial stability of banks in the VUCA-world conditions. Banks and Bank Systems, 16 (1), 182–194. doi:10.21511/bbs.16(1).2021.16
12. Millar, C. C. J. M., Groth, O., & Mahon, J. F. (2018). Management Innovation in a VUCA World: Challenges and Recommendations. California Management Review, 61(1), 5–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/0008125618805111
13. Amil, Alinor C. (2024). Leadership Decision-Making in Vuca Bureaucracy: Glob- al Turbulence, Influence, Challenges, and Strategies. International Journal of Multidisci plinary Research & Reviews, vol 03, No. 03, pp. 109–127. https://doi.org/10.56815/IJMRR. V3I3.2024/109-127
14. Buckley, P. J. (2020). The theory and empirics of the structural reshaping of global- ization. J Int Bus Stud 51, 1580–1592. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-020-00355-5
15. Batorowska, K. H. (2024). A sense of information security in the VUCA world.
Modern Management Systems, 19(1), 39–54. https://doi.org/10.37055/nsz/192813
16. Warren, C. (2010). The geometry of security: Modeling interstate alliances as evolving networks. Journal of Peace Research, 47, 697–709. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343 310386270
17. Heinonen, S., Karjalainen, J., Ruotsalainen, J., & Steinmüller, K. (2017). Surprise as the new normal – implications for energy security. European Journal of Futures Re search, 5, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/S40309-017-0117-5.
18. Martins, B. (2019). Global affairs and the politics of security technologies. Global Affairs, 5, 105–106. https://doi.org/10.1080/23340460.2019.1608456
19. Moore, E., Brandl, K., & Dau, L. (2019). Institutional Schisms in Argentina: The Impact of Intergovernmental Organizations on Country Institutional Environments. Progress in International Business Research. https://doi.org/10.1108/s1745-886220190000014007.
20. Dalby, S. (1990). American security discourse: the persistence of geopolitics. Po litical Geography Quarterly, 9, 171–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/0260-9827(90)90017-5.
21. Roberts, A. (2008). International Relations after the Cold War. International Af fairs, 84, 335–350. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1468-2346.2008.00706.X.
22. Kirshner, J. (1998). Political economy in security studies after the cold war. Review of International Political Economy, 5, 64–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/096922998347651.
23. Lu, J.-y. (2001). [The geopolitical
pattern of Asia-Pacific and China's national security interests in the post Cold War years].
[Human Geography], 16(6), 69–72. https://doi.org/10.13959/j.issn.1003-
2398.2001.06.018
24. Cox, M. (2001). Whatever Happened to American Decline? International Rela- tions and the New United States Hegemony. New Political Economy, 6, 311–340. https://doi. org/10.1080/13563460120091333.
25. Wohlforth, W. (1998). Reality Check: Revising Theories of International Politics in Response to the End of the Cold War. World Politics, 50, 650–680. https://doi.org/10.1017/ S0043887100007395.
26. Singh, R. (2002). The Non-State Actor as the Potent New Enemy in Global Poli- tics: Beginning of The Third Phase in International Relations. India Quarterly, 58, 105–118. https://doi.org/10.1177/097492840205800109.
27. Kavalski, E. (2007). The fifth debate and the emergence of complex interna- tional relations theory: notes on the application of complexity theory to the study of in- ternational life. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 20, 435–454. https://doi. org/10.1080/09557570701574154.
28. Lehmann, K. (2012). Unfinished transformation: The three phases of complexity's emergence into international relations and foreign policy. Cooperation and Conflict, 47, 404–413. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010836712454274.
29. Bousquet, A., & Geyer, R. (2011). Introduction: complexity and the international arena. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 24, 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1080/095575 71.2011.558713.
30. Hopmann, T. (2003). Adapting International Relations Theory to the End of the Cold War. Journal of Cold War Studies, 5, 96–101. https://doi.org/10.1162/152039703322286791.
31. Dávila, M. (2004). The Contribution of Reinhold Niebuhr's 'Moral Ambigu- ity' to Contemporary Discussions on the Morality of Intervention and the Use of Force in a Post-Cold War World. Political Theology, 5(2), 177–199. https://doi.org/10.1558/ poth.2004.5.2.177
32. Lahmiri, S., & Bekiros, S. (2017). Disturbances and complexity in volatility time se- ries. Chaos Solitons & Fractals, 105, 38–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CHAOS.2017.10.006.
