Criteria of action
Face to face with adequate self-coordination of the team, it will be necessary to define and unify a criterion of action. Beyond that we should identify a contingency plan as an alternative criterion, because in complexity any plan, although necessary, is only initially admitted as only one of the possibly valid options. Adequate criterion therefore will be the one that complements the planning with feedback control, flexibility and capacity for reaction.
The definition of the criterion of action is the main element in making decisions. Therefore we can identify the making of decisions as the manifestation of this criterion. In complexity the capacity for establishing a criterion and making decisions is not easy due to the rationality of individuals is bounded by the information they have, the cognitive limitations of their minds, and the finite quantity of time they have to take decisions (Simon, 1997). Simon faces this bounded rationality with the objective rationality of an economic man taking the following three phases:
- Analysis of the options are possible alternatives
- Prevision and consideration of the consequences derived from each option
- Establishment of system of values as criterion of selection. This process is faced with at least three limitations:
41Communication in symmetry (equality) is especially useful in the common development and analysis processes, which does not mean that it can coexist with communication in complementarity (inequality) when it means transferring views or objectives. Communication in symmetry is expressed from motivation while communication in complementarity is from demand.
- Rationality requires full knowledge and anticipation the consequences of each option.
- Values subject to the consequences, as these occur in the future, can only be anticipated in an imperfect manner.
- Rationality requires being able to choose among all the possible behaviours and only a few of them can be anticipated.
For that reason and for the fact that a human being can only know a fraction of the knowledge that surrounds an action, a strictly rational decision is not possible. Alternatively, the administrator (in terms of Simon) should satisfy more than maximize without examining all the possible alternative behaviours and assuming that those are in fact “all” the alternatives.
David Snowden, in an article that was the cover of the Harvard Business Review in November 2007 and that has received an award from the Academy of Management, prepared a guide for making decisions for leaders proposing the following criterion in accord to the context (Snowden & Boone, November 2007)42.
42 This summary appears in the reference article (Snowden & Boone, November 2007). For a deeper analysis see “The new dynamics of strategy: Sense-making in a complex and complicated world” cost-free access at IBM Journal for Research and Development http://researchweb.watson.ibm.com/journal/sj/423/kurtz.html (Consulted in November 2008).
| THE CONTEXT’S CHARACTERISTICS | THE LEADER’S JOB | DANGER SIGNALS | RESPONSE TO DANGER SIGNALS | |
| Simple | •Repeating patterns and consistent events •Clear cause-andeffect relationships evident to everyone; right answer exists •Known knowns | •Sense, categorize, respond •Ensure that proper processes are in place •Delegate •Use best practices •Communicate in clear, direct ways •Understand that | •Complacency and comfort •Desire to make complex problems simple •Entrained thinking •No challenge of received wisdom •Overreliance on | •Create communication channels to challenge orthodoxy •Stay connected without micromanaging •Don’t assume things are simple |
| •Fact-based management | extensive interactive communication may not be necessary | best practice if context shifts | •Recognize both the value and the limitations of best practice | |
| Complicated | •Expert diagnosis required •Cause-and-effect relationships discoverable but not immediately apparent to everyone; more than one right answer possible | •Sense, analyze, respond •Create panels of experts •Listen to conflicting advice | •Experts overconfident in their own solutions or in the efficacy of past solutions •Analysis paralysis •Expert panels •Viewpoints of | •Encourage external and internal stakeholders to challenge expert opinions to combat entrained thinking •Use experiments and games to |
| •Known unknowns •Fact-based management | nonexperts excluded | force people to think outside the familiar |
| THE CONTEXT’S CHARACTERISTICS | THE LEADER’S JOB | DANGER SIGNALS | RESPONSE TO DANGER SIGNALS | |
| Complex | •Flux and unpredictability •No right answers; emergent instructive patterns •Unknown unknowns •Many competing ideas •A need for creative and innovative approaches •Pattern-based | •Probe, sense, respond •Create environments and experiments that allow patterns to emerge •Increase levels of interaction and communication •Use methods that can help generate ideas: Open up discussion (as through large | •Temptation to fall back into habitual, command-andcontrol mode •Temptation to look for facts rather than allowing patterns to emerge •Desire for accelerated resolution of problems or | •Be patient and allow time for reflection •Use approaches that encourage interaction so patterns can emerge |
| leadership | group methods); set barriers; stimulate attractors; encourage dissent and diversity; and manage starting conditions and monitor for emergence | exploitation of opportunities | ||
| Chaotic | •High turbulence •No clear causeand-effect relationships, so no point in looking for right answers •Unknowables •Many decisions to make and no time to think | •Act, sense, respond •Look for what works instead of seeking right answers •Take immediate action to reestablish order (command and control) | •Applying a command-andcontrol approach longer than needed •“Cult of the leader” •Missed opportunity for innovation •Chaos unabated | •Set up mechanisms (such as parallel teams) to take advantage of opportunities afforded by a chaotic environment •Encourage advisers to challenge your |
| •High tension •Pattern-based leadership | •Provide clear, direct communication | point of view once the crisis has abated •Work to shift the context from chaotic to complex |
Comments (0)