Week 8 is finally in
the books and my brain feels like grits after all the research and discussions
on Cynefin Framework and how it can help leaders “avoid inappropriate
reactions...” and “…lead effectively in a variety of situations” (Snowden & Boone,
2007) .
I am faced with numerous decisions to make every day; some simple, some
complex, and some that are just downright complicated. One of the critical
lessons I have learned, often the hard way, is that there is no perfect
situation that leads to the perfect solution. By now being exposed to the
Cynefin Framework contexts, I can see how based upon each uniquely defined
situation, we tend to fall into one of four Cynefin quadrants.
As I mentioned in my
research this week, leaders tend to go with what we know, and move on to the
next priority. However, what the framework offers to leaders in the course of
decision making process doesn’t contain a simple or straight forward
resolution; instead, what it does offer is the concept of each of the
opportunities characteristics, what the leaders role entails, as well as what
pitfalls to be aware of and attempt to avoid (Snowden & Boone, 2007).
As each quadrant is explored,
we find what course of action leaders can follow in order to bring themselves
towards the considerations most relevant for each type of complex decision they
encounter. The
Cynefin framework is based upon four essential quadrants of integrated and
calculated forms of thinking and responding to challenges based upon varying
levels of complexity and the disorder that accompanies ones success in
balancing “…multiple demands…” in a notably unpredictable world with
unpredictable elements, emotions, and people (Snowden & Boone, 2007) .
The simple quadrant
is based upon facts and requires little thought or contemplation because the
answer appears obvious and straight forward. Many leaders would file this
quadrant under Standard Operating Procedures (SOP’s), or seeing the cause and
effect as predictable and repeatable. The complicated quadrant tells us to
sense, analyze, and then respond to the issue. We most likely need to
collaborate with others on these types of challenges, and usually this is where a
variety of good practices can emerge from varying vantage points.
With the complex quadrant, there tends
to be a great deal of uncertainty and there is no obvious answer. This requires
leaders to probe, sense, and respond based upon increased “…levels of interaction
and communication…” that will allow for collaboration (Snowden & Boone, 2007) in order to
determine the best strategy to emerge over time (Schloss, 2014) . Lastly, with the chaos quadrant, as
researched this week, this is a highly unknown turbulent area that tends to
demonstrate no clear cut cause-and-effect for evaluation (Snowden & Boone, 2007) , but lends the most
opportunity for creativity, innovation, and positive change. I believe this
because there is no right answer, no history to extrapolate from, nor is there
any time for planning or predictability, in essence, “To continue growth, the
original pattern must be broken, rearranged, and then restructured” (Schloss, 2014) .
I
learned several key lessons with all that we uncovered related to Cynefin that
will be at the top of my list for a while.
For
example, with the simple quadrant, as a leader I need to be aware that I can oversimplify
things when under pressure, leading me to the wrong assumptions and confusing a
simple situation with a complex one. Additionally, by constantly relying upon
this frame, we forget to challenge the status quo and become complacent over
time.
In
the complicated context, which allows for some analysis and several emerging
solutions to unfold, leaders should be aware that when addressing challenges
from a purely fact-based approach, it can lead us to myopia. Additionally,
within this quadrant, a variety of collaborative good practices can emerge,
provided you are encouraging and supporting an environment that welcomes
innovative ideas from various vantage points.
With the complex quadrant, where
leaders need to probe, sense and respond (Snowden & Boone, 2007) , there is a constant
unpredictability that lends to no blatant patterns for cause-and-effect. As
leaders, we need to probe, sense, and respond based upon increased “…levels of
interaction and communication…” that will allow for collaboration (Snowden & Boone, 2007) in order to
determine the best strategy to emerge over time (Schloss, 2014) . I have to remember to be patient –
this is a quadrant where shoot, aim, fire doesn’t work and in doing so, goes against
the important theme of reflection in all we do.
Lastly, in the highly turbulent chaos
quadrant, leaders must remember to “…look for what works instead of seeking
right answers” (Snowden & Boone, 2007) . As my research
demonstrated, this necessitates decisive action and decisions to take place
while providing clear and direct communication to the other team members during
a time of crisis. The two main issues I see here are first, if we constantly
operate in an environment of chaos, we will never learn that we can change it
to being either complex or complicated. When we are under constant pressure to
perform and not critically think and reflect, we have no choice but throw
something at the wall and see if it sticks. In this case, leaders are forced to
“act, sense, respond” (Snowden & Boone, 2007) to find what works
for the moment, versus what is really the right resolution should be.
There may never be a cut and dry
problem or solution that we encounter day in and day out, however, by applying
the Cynefin Framework to what we encounter on a daily basis, leaders will be
able to provide and positively reinforce the foundation to improved contexts
for decision making. Cynefin framework encourages analytical reflection,
evaluation, and exploration, in order to demonstrate that linear decision making
can often be misapplied over the course of our leadership endeavors. We are
able to then have a deeper appreciation of the context of the problem, embrace
the level of complexity necessary, while adapting to the need to change our
leadership style which is most appropriate for the situation at hand (Snowden & Boone, 2007) .
Until we blog again!
References
Schloss, E. P. (2014). A dynamic framework for
planning under simple, complicated, and complex conditions. Business
Insights.
Snowden, D. J., & Boone, M. E. (2007, November).
A Leader’s Framework for Decision Making. Retrieved from Harvard
Business Review:
https://hbr.org/2007/11/a-leaders-framework-for-decision-making
No comments:
Post a Comment