A decision lens for complexity v10
0 likes1,181 views
The document discusses the dynamics between knowledge workers and managers in organizations. There is a constant tension as knowledge workers collect and assemble information, while managers connect, convey, and shape information to set agendas. This represents the "pull" of knowledge workers and the "push" of managers to influence boundaries. Bureaucratic struggles are not simply due to personalities, but rather stem from the fundamental tensions between these groups in organizations.
![2/1/2015
12
[Curmudgeon series] 12: Avoiding uncertainty and anti-
intellectualism
“The dichotomy of empirically validated recipes married to the
myth of the inspired leader is one illustration of that. You
either follow a recipe or handover decision making
responsibility to the cult leader or the cult method.”
“Ordered systems sustain recipes and repetition, chaotic
systems in the main require decisive leadership or simply
waiting for order to emerge (the free market
perspective/heresy) but complex systems work in very
different ways.”
“We manage an emergent flow not a static position. Once you
embrace uncertainty it is no longer a scary place. What
makes its scary, and creates the space for snake oil sales
people and other charlatans (including some well meaning
ones) is trying to pretend it doesn't exist.”
http://cognitive-edge.com/blog/entry/6417/ride-the-wave/
Feb-15@tonyjoyce 23
Dissipate Absorb
ExploitVisible
Boundaries
Intelligence
Tolerance
Hope
Cynefin
Cult leader
Recipe followers Charlatans
Protector
Free Market
These leader/group behaviors closely match the organizational
forms that Boisot describes in i-Space
In free market,
boundaries shift
by evolution
(e.g. agency)
Feb-15@tonyjoyce 24
Fiefs = Cult leaders
Clans = Charlatans
Bureaucracy = Recipes](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/adecisionlensforcomplexityv10-150201165642-conversion-gate01/85/A-decision-lens-for-complexity-v10-12-320.jpg)
![2/1/2015
13
[My comment] “It should be obvious ... but it isn't, as this
level of essential uncertainty is rarely acknowledged in
large organizations.”
“Running multiple parallel safe-to-fail experiments in
organizations takes time and money as well as some strong
insulation from the normal business, which is conducted by a
collection of recipe users, cult leaders and exploitative
operatives.”
“One of the few powers of executives is their time, often
measured in very small increments. What they attend to as
well as what they protect, or fail to acknowledge, is
telegraphed quickly through the power centers of the
organization.”
“This signaling is the essential function of Art Kleiner's Core
Group theory.”
“Dave's "dumbing down" for the CEO is not an exercise in
educating the individual as much as it is navigating the
gauntlet of gatekeepers to reach the inner sanctum of the
shadow core group, the powers behind the throne, if I am
reading the context rightly.”
Feb-15@tonyjoyce 25
Dissipate Absorb
ExploitVisible
Boundaries
Intelligence
Tolerance
Hope
Cynefin
Core Group
(willing to live with uncertainty)
CEO (attention) Shadow Core
(gatekeepers)
Manager
Core Group roles/behaviors are a reflection of the power dynamics and
signaling (complex system flows) in the upper levels of organizations
Free Market
Feb-15@tonyjoyce 26](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/adecisionlensforcomplexityv10-150201165642-conversion-gate01/85/A-decision-lens-for-complexity-v10-13-320.jpg)
A decision lens for complexity v10
- 1. 2/1/2015 1 @tonyjoyce V10 Feb 2015 Bureaucratic battles can be toxic when personalities and a culture’s unstated norms are the subject being argued. They can be ungrounded and unrealistic when groupthink has set in. But neither mode is the fundamental nature of bureaucratic struggles. What persists is a constant tension between knowledge workers who collect, curate and assemble information, and the managers and media leaders who connect, convey and dissemble information. The first pull, in the sense of Brown & Hagel’s “Power of Pull.” The second push at the first’s boundaries by setting agenda’s, starting and stopping dialogue, and exercising the other instruments of power in organizations. Feb-15@tonyjoyce 2
- 2. 2/1/2015 2 Part 1 Feb-15@tonyjoyce 3 Chaotic domain is temporary or constantly changing; not something that can be explicitly examined From emailed conversation with Snowden on a proposed framework Simple/Obvious domain is deceptive I have a pessimistic view of what is called Obvious, as it frequently seems to be avoidance of confronting hard decisions or inspecting the detailed evidence Balancing in the Complex domain is key We internalize or absorb the tension Feb-15@tonyjoyce 4
- 4. 2/1/2015 4 Idealists accept that people will or can change vs. pragmatics that anticipate people will resist change In idealists there is a tolerance of resistance that pragmatics dislike On the other side, pragmatists are less certain of the outcomes, which idealists may take as a lack of commitment These sentiments lead to polarized politics! Feb-15@tonyjoyce 7 Snowden characterizes the divide as the “difference between defining an ideal future state, or set of behaviors that are desirable, or acting in the present to change things so that people's attitudes and beliefs change as a result of their interactions on the other.” http://cognitive-edge.com/blog/entry/6384/between- the-ideal-and-real/ Feb-15@tonyjoyce 8
- 5. 2/1/2015 5 Visible Exploit Absorb Dissipate Sense of present Social- Moral Us-we- them Constraints on future Feb-15@tonyjoyce 9 Polarity Explanation Perception Constraints on future Justification of faith alone (Snowden #1) Idealism 1 Sense of Present Justification of works and faith (Snowden #1) Pragmatism 2 Us/we/them Vague “us” and “them” Agency 3 Social/Moral Stronger “we” and “ours” Empathy 4 Feb-15@tonyjoyce 10 Snowden: http://cognitive-edge.com/blog/entry/6384/between-the-ideal-and-real/
- 6. 2/1/2015 6 Dissipate Absorb ExploitVisible Agency Empathy Pragmatism Idealism Cynefin Feb-15@tonyjoyce 11 Part 3 Feb-15@tonyjoyce 12
- 7. 2/1/2015 7 Source Domain Characteristic (from) Flow (via) Perception (to) Chaotic Dissipate Agency Pragmatism (or) Idealism Complex Absorb Pragmatism Agency (or) Empathy Complicated Exploit Empathy Idealism (or) Pragmatism Obvious Visible Idealism Empathy (or) Agency Some strange combinations: Avoidance & Idealism (faith alone) serves to amplify blind spots Absorption & Pragmatism (means & faith) diminishes future interests This chart separates the static domains from the dynamic flows Feb-15@tonyjoyce 13 The Role of Constraints http://cognitive-edge.com/blog/entry/6385/complex-or-chaotic/ The 3I’s Intent, deliberate or habituation Interaction, which are directed or free-will Intelligence, from self-reflection and communication (feedback) from others Interaction with the system as a whole in multiple (simultaneous) ways Emergence with constraints Vice randomness Or blind compliance with rules Feb-15@tonyjoyce 14
- 8. 2/1/2015 8 Dissipate Absorb Exploit Agency Empathy Pragmatism Idealism Tolerance of risk Hopeful Intent Intelligence Visible Boundaries Cynefin Cognition Perception Feb-15@tonyjoyce 15 What is the return path? What is the context of (our knowledge)? Does it bring us back to the same domain (status quo)? Or do we return (in the conversation) to a changed state? A return to status quo is stasis, aka “resistance” Action - Cognition (the upper layer) stems from scaffold’s Perceptions Action pathways follow the flow of meaning This is different from following the force of hierarchy or privilege And different from following the energy of the topical or popular interest Feb-15@tonyjoyce 16
- 9. 2/1/2015 9 Part 4 Feb-15@tonyjoyce 17 Dissipate Absorb ExploitVisible Boundaries Intelligence Tolerance Hope Cynefin Feb-15@tonyjoyce 18 Emergent
- 10. 2/1/2015 10 Can we remove the scaffolding? Are these entrained relationships? Are they habituated in Cartesian thinking? Or are they systemic to social networks (human systems)? Other scaffolds may reveal other emergent properties Feb-15@tonyjoyce 19 Domain Characteristic Perception Emergent Property Obvious Visible Idealism Hope Complicated Exploit Empathy Intelligence Complex Absorb Pragmatism Tolerance Chaotic Dissipate Agency Boundary The pathway from intent to boundaries is always tenuous Remember this is the hook (catastrophic gulf) division Note also “all paths up are different, all paths down are the same” Feb-15@tonyjoyce 20 Hope Boundaries Visible Dissipate Agency Idealism
- 12. 2/1/2015 12 [Curmudgeon series] 12: Avoiding uncertainty and anti- intellectualism “The dichotomy of empirically validated recipes married to the myth of the inspired leader is one illustration of that. You either follow a recipe or handover decision making responsibility to the cult leader or the cult method.” “Ordered systems sustain recipes and repetition, chaotic systems in the main require decisive leadership or simply waiting for order to emerge (the free market perspective/heresy) but complex systems work in very different ways.” “We manage an emergent flow not a static position. Once you embrace uncertainty it is no longer a scary place. What makes its scary, and creates the space for snake oil sales people and other charlatans (including some well meaning ones) is trying to pretend it doesn't exist.” http://cognitive-edge.com/blog/entry/6417/ride-the-wave/ Feb-15@tonyjoyce 23 Dissipate Absorb ExploitVisible Boundaries Intelligence Tolerance Hope Cynefin Cult leader Recipe followers Charlatans Protector Free Market These leader/group behaviors closely match the organizational forms that Boisot describes in i-Space In free market, boundaries shift by evolution (e.g. agency) Feb-15@tonyjoyce 24 Fiefs = Cult leaders Clans = Charlatans Bureaucracy = Recipes
- 13. 2/1/2015 13 [My comment] “It should be obvious ... but it isn't, as this level of essential uncertainty is rarely acknowledged in large organizations.” “Running multiple parallel safe-to-fail experiments in organizations takes time and money as well as some strong insulation from the normal business, which is conducted by a collection of recipe users, cult leaders and exploitative operatives.” “One of the few powers of executives is their time, often measured in very small increments. What they attend to as well as what they protect, or fail to acknowledge, is telegraphed quickly through the power centers of the organization.” “This signaling is the essential function of Art Kleiner's Core Group theory.” “Dave's "dumbing down" for the CEO is not an exercise in educating the individual as much as it is navigating the gauntlet of gatekeepers to reach the inner sanctum of the shadow core group, the powers behind the throne, if I am reading the context rightly.” Feb-15@tonyjoyce 25 Dissipate Absorb ExploitVisible Boundaries Intelligence Tolerance Hope Cynefin Core Group (willing to live with uncertainty) CEO (attention) Shadow Core (gatekeepers) Manager Core Group roles/behaviors are a reflection of the power dynamics and signaling (complex system flows) in the upper levels of organizations Free Market Feb-15@tonyjoyce 26
- 14. 2/1/2015 14 Part 6 Feb-15@tonyjoyce 27 Organizatio n Function Regime General (Concrete) Contextual (Abstract) Easy (Codified) Hard (Uncodified) Available (Diffuse) Controlled (Undiffused) Activity Characteristic Bureaucra cy Ordered Abstract Codified Undiffused Recipes Visible Markets Complex Abstract Codified Diffuse Disruptive Innovation Boundaries Clans Chaotic Concrete Uncodified Undiffused Charlatans Exploit Fiefs Complex Concrete Uncodified Diffused Cult Leaders & Followers Hope Manager Complex Abstract Uncodified Diffused Connector (selective) Intelligence Shadow Core Complex Abstract Uncodified Undiffused Gatekeeper (restrictive) Absorb (filtering) Core Group Complex Concrete Codified Diffused Management Committee (activity, agendas) Tolerate (disputes) Chief Executive Complex Concrete Codified Undiffused Attention Span (passive, observed) Dissipate (power) Feb-15@tonyjoyce 28 Via signals & fragments
- 15. 2/1/2015 15 Feb-15@tonyjoyce 29 Core Group CEO Shadow Core Manager Clans Fiefs Bureaucracies Markets Boisot’s classic pattern of the Social Learning Cycle Core Group Pattern Of Management Dialogues Is there a preferred direction in the Core Group pattern? Formal procedures by definition move from Manager to Core to CEO Are managers more effective via Core Group or Shadow Core? Are there opportunities or dangers in the easy alignments of verticals? Bureaucracies & Shadow Core Managers & Markets CEO & Fiefs Core Group & Clans Are there easy connections along any face? Or are such linkages proscribed by rules or ethics? i.e. Fiefs, Clans, Shadow Core & Manager: the four points on the Uncodified (bottom) plane Feb-15@tonyjoyce 30
- 16. 2/1/2015 16 Feb-15@tonyjoyce 31 Proprietary Knowledge (Bureaucracy) Textbook Knowledge (Markets) Common Sense (Clans) Personal Knowledge (Fiefs) Manager Core Group Shadow Core CEO Impersonal Relationships Competitive Relationships Peer Relationships Personal Relationships Social Learning Formal Procedures Privileged Or Covert? 4-points method Triads (with focused questions) Sensemaker ™ landscapes Feb-15@tonyjoyce 32
- 17. 2/1/2015 17 Part 7 Feb-15@tonyjoyce 33 Knowledge Transactions & Exchanges Signals & Fragments Fiefs, Clans, Bureaucracies, Markets (i-Space) Core Group, Shadow Core Group (Art Kleiner) Ordered systems, Chaotic systems Complex systems “Knowledge is power”, Hierarchy Constant tension & emergent flow Image from http://www.enclaria.com/2015/01/08/balancing-power-and- influence-as-a-leader-during-change/ Feb-15@tonyjoyce 34
- 18. 2/1/2015 18 Order Predominates Boisot i-Space Allee Value network analysis Unorder Predominates Snowden Cynefin, complexity, fragments Kurtz Cynefin “eyes”, PNI Eoyang Container-difference- exchange Feb-15@tonyjoyce 35