I just returned from a trip to London to experience the updated 4-day Cognitive Edge accreditation training and to meet some of the CE’rs I’ve known virtually for many years (like Michael Cheveldave and Peter Stanbridge) face to face. Several new ideas were introduced, probably the biggest one being the renaming of the simple domain of Cynefin to “obvious”.
It’s been interesting to reflect on my experience of hosting Dave in SA in October where we had an overwhelmingly positive response, and seeing the response of international course participants in London. If the positive reception we’ve been getting from senior executives (among others) is any indication, complexity certainly seems to have “crossed the chasm” in terms of adoption. It is becoming increasingly main-stream, and while positive for those early adopters (like me) who’ve been struggling to convince decision makers to do things differently for the last 10 or so years, it’s also led to a proliferation of consultants wanting to “jump onto the complexity band wagon”.
The problem with complexity is that it is hard to accurately define it. Dave used this quote from the Bible to illustrate: “For now we see through a glass darkly … now I know in part” – 1 Cor 13:12. When in comes to complexity, we can definitely say what it’s not, but not what it is. It is not just an extension of systems thinking, and it is not the same as chaos theory. For decision-makers and business in general, it requires a paradigm shift: a completely different way of thinking and seeing the world as well as completely different methods. Old methods that have been slightly reworked and re-badged with complexity terms will not be effective. Decision-makers need to beware of complexity “snake-oil salesmen” selling methods with no grounding in science.
There are also some who want to make complexity the solution to everything: a silver bullet. While ordered systems approaches have overly dominated management thinking for the last few decades, we must be careful that the pendulum doesn’t swing too far in the other direction. Claims that everything is complex and therefore un-manageable; that things should be left to spontaneously self-organise (which Dave satirises to be similar to spontaneous combustion in human systems) and that management is now superfluous are dangerous.
One of the things I’ve always appreciated about Cynefin is the idea of bounded applicability and multi-ontology sense-making. One kind of system (and it’s methods and approaches) is not privileged over another. Order and un-order are equally valid. Key is to know which system you’re in and to act appropriately.