Rethinking Complexity

Will the real systemic leaders please stand up?

Last night on CNN, Republican Congressman Trey Gowdy of South Carolina used the "s" word to describe the kind of change he wants to see in Washington, D.C., to end the recurring debt-default issue once and for all.

The "s" word he used was systemic.

"Systemic change," Mr. Gowdy said, is the change he'd like to approve. But no one's offered it yet, according to the congressman.

Hearing a Capitol Hill politician utter the word "systemic" surprised me. With all due respect to Mr. Gowdy, Washington logic doesn't seem to favor systems thinking. This country has, after all, been on a collision course with fiscal disaster for quite some time, relying on short-term fixes that fail to resolve underlying, systemic problems in the long run.

I felt compelled this morning to answer Mr. Gowdy's plea for systemic change by offering an apolitical, bipartisan response from a systems perspective. I turned to authors Annabel Beerel and Donella H. Meadows for help.

A system, according to Meadows' 2008 book Thinking in Systems: A Primer, "is an interconnected set of elements that is coherently organized in a way that achieves something." A system, Meadows wrote, consists of elements, interconnections, and a function or purpose.

When a problem arises, many organizations nowadays typically hone in on the element that seems to be causing the problem and try to fix the element on its own as a separate entity. Isolating the troubled element, however, ignores all of its interconnections within the system. So changing one element in the system will—in some way—affect all of the other elements in the system too. When that happens, the function or purpose of the system will also change.

Is unemployment a sign of "uncertainty" - or the need for a new set of assumptions?

As America’s countdown towards default continues, we keep hearing that it’s “uncertainty” about the economy that is keeping companies with big bank on hand from hiring new employees. 

That seems reasonable on its face.  After all, the news reports say we’re headed towards financial Armageddon … and honestly they have for some time.  Sure, the “countdown towards default” is an especially noticeable cliff we’re running towards, but America has never really addressed the economic fault lines that nearly cracked apart in 2008, and the European Union is teetering from one crisis to another …

“Uncertainty” seems about right.

But as Andrew Leonard of Salon.com points out, the idea that companies aren’t hiring because of uncertainty about the economic future doesn’t actually account for all the facts.  Business hiring is weak … but business spending on equipment and facilities and buildings is “robust.”

So companies are willing to spend, and spend big, during this time of uncertainty:  they’re just not willing to spend on people.

If there’s a better epigram for the 21st century economy so far, I can’t think of what it is. 

Before Spiral Dynamics, There Was ECLET

Don Beck and Chris Cowan, the authors of Spiral Dynamics: Mastering Values, Leadership, and Change worked with Dr. Clare Grave for about 10 years prior to his death in 1986.  Spiral dynamics has its roots in the research of Dr. Graves and is one of the most popular practices in value systems in use today by organizational development professionals and leaders across industries.

Graves developed the Emergent Cyclical Levels of Existence Theory (or ECLET) from the data he collected in the 1950’s on the subject of the personality of the mature adult in operation.  Graves did not have a theory in mind when he started his research.  He simply wanted to understand the differences in personalities in mature adults as they relate to their human experience.  His research involved having his students write an essay describing the personality of a mature adult in operation.

In his analysis, Graves used a trained panel to classify the data as it was being collected. The initial classification yielded two groups: one for individuals whose concept of the mature adult was denying/sacrificing self and the other about expressing self.  The sacrifice-self group was determined to have an external locus of control and aimed to make meaning of life through input from the world resulting in actions to modify and improve self.  In contrast, the express-self group was found to have an internal locus of control, getting direction exclusively from within and focusing actions on changing the world.

Compromise: The New “C” Word

Americans can rest a little easier today reassured that people with genuine differences of opinion can find it in their hearts to compromise rather than allow their constituents to suffer from a dangerous game of brinksmanship. I’m referring, of course, to the resolution of the NFL lock-out. Our government may default on our financial obligations, but at least we’ll be able to watch athletes pass a football while our politicians pass a devalued buck. The new, dreaded “C” word of the day is “compromise.”

In his recent book, On Compromise and Rotten Compromises, Avishai Margolit, professor emeritus of philosophy at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, refers to compromise as “an ambivalent concept.” On the one hand, we laud those who can preserve friendship or peace through cooperation. On the other hand, we revile those who too readily accede to intransigence. Compromise can be pragmatic and strategic, consider the resolution of the Cuban missile crisis; compromise can be cowardly and weak, consider much of the historic judgment against policies of appeasement during the rise of Nazi Germany. In an environment where words are chosen carefully to frame a perception in order to influence another’s thinking, how we conceptualize compromise matters.

From Systems Thinking to Systems Being

A system is a set of interconnected elements which form a whole and show properties which are properties of the whole rather than of the individual elements. This definition is valid for a cell, an organism, a society, or a galaxy. Joanna Macy says that a system is less a thing than a pattern—a pattern of organization. It consists of a dynamic flow of interactions which is non-summative, irreducible, and integrated at a new level of organization permitted by the interdependence of its parts. The word “system” derives from the Greek “synhistanai” which means “to place together.”  

In his seminal book Systems Thinking, Systems Practice, Peter Checkland defined systems thinking as thinking about the world through the concept of “system.” This involves thinking in terms of processes rather than structures, relationships rather than components, interconnections rather than separation. The focus of the inquiry is on the organization and the dynamics generated by the complex interaction of systems embedded in other systems and composed by other systems.

From a cognitive perspective, systems thinking integrates analysis and synthesis. Natural science has been primarily reductionistic, studying the components of systems and using quantitative empirical verification. Human science, as a response to the use of positivistic methods for studying human phenomena, has embraced more holistic approaches, studying social phenomena through qualitative means to create meaning. Systems thinking bridges these two approaches by using both analysis and synthesis to create knowledge and understanding and integrating an ethical perspective.  Analysis answers the ‘what’ and ‘how’ questions while synthesis answers the ‘why’ and ‘what for’ questions. By combining analysis and synthesis, systems thinking creates a rich inquiring platform for approaches such as social systems design, developed by Bela H. Banathy,  and evolutionary systems design, as Alexander Laszlo and myself have developed to include a deeper understanding of a system in its larger context as well as a vision of the future for co-creating ethical innovations for sustainability.

Renewing Our "Story" in the Workplace

A lot of people consider “storying” an inborn knack or talent. Some listen intently, while others envy the natural-born storytellers around them. Truth is, natural “storying” with strategic intent can be learned by anyone. 

"Storying," or storytelling, as a means of expressing personal identity has risen in popularity recently among career advisors and executive consultants. Leadership researchers have also become intrigued in studying the notion of storying.

Among rhetorical strategies, telling a "good story" helps people make meaning.  Several authors note that storying also increases the likelihood that a person's identity claims will be accepted by others.

We all have identity claims that we bring with us, especially when we enter a new workplace. With more pressure placed on executives to make meaning for their employees through storytelling, it's clear why business scholars have become increasingly enchanted in studying narrative as a means of knowing, as a means of understanding work identity, and as a means of effectively leading organizations. 

So, what’s my story going to be? You may wonder.

That's a question contemplated by so many people I meet these days—from workers in transition to new hires. With possibilities and opportunities ripening before them, this group of professionals feel compelled to create or shape a "provisional" or "new" self. If their stories don't make relevant meaning for others, their audience of leaders, peers, and followers may not validate their claims—yikes! 

Dealing with Complexity, Dogs, and Fearful Neighbors

I have a problem with my neighbors and it's bothering me more than I like to admit. I like having good neighbors and was raised to be a good neighbor, but there's basic problem we can't seem to resolve: They fear and hate dogs; my husband and I have two dogs.

Our problem may sound simple, but it's a complex situation. So I decided to use complexity as a lens for exploring what's going on. The idea to do so came to me while attending an online webinar recently.

During the webinar, we learned how to use a mind mapping tool that I already use often for presentations. So I used that same mind mapping tool to try to understand the complexity that's driving our neighborly conflict.

My neighbors—a couple—are terrified of dogs. The man and the woman both share the same level of deathly fear toward all pooches.

Our trouble with the neighbors started one afternoon some weeks ago when our rescued, black Labrador Retriever ran up to one of them—the husband—and started barking fiercely. Our lab startled him. She had escaped from our yard earlier that day after I accidently left the garage door open when I went out to run a few errands.

That mistake never happened again, but it sparked our current predicament. So I wondered, could trauma have something to do with this?

Is the world going to become sustainable ... on its own?

Leading thinkers in sustainability have known for some time now that a sustainable society can’t be based on continuous consumption.  The question was always:  how do we get there?

A recent column in the New York Times suggests that it’s happening on its own, without any help from us.

In “We’re Spent,” journalist David Leonhardt suggests that the drying up of credit and access to easy debt is functioning the same way as environmentalists have suggested that running out of natural resources eventually will.  It’s causing a system that is powered by a disposable consumer mentality to run down. 

“(T)he economic version of the law of gravity is reasserting itself,” he writes.  “We are feeling the deferred pain from 25 years of excess, as people try to rebuild their depleted savings … The old consumer economy is gone, and it’s not coming back.”

Could it be that easy?  Are economic realities going to do what decades of environmental awareness-raising and activism couldn’t? 

Impressions of the U.S. from South Asia

Omigod—I'm due to write a blog and I have nothing to say! Oh, wait, yes I do—I’ve been in South Asia for a few weeks. Why don’t I try to put together some impressions of Asia and compare it from afar to the U.S.? That's what we've been doing over dinner since I've been here.

I have been in Hong Kong, Kuala Lumpur, and Singapore, in recent weeks conducting workshops for young members of business families. Our discussions have given me a cross-section of the current state of business and commerce in South Asia, and a bit of insight into their contrasting social and political institutions. I'll save the family business discussion for another post and talk about the social political systems here.

The biggest attention-grabber in this region is the tremendous amount of energy of its people—working, relaxing, and building. Singapore, especially, is a city of young people, but each city is full of gigantic new neighborhoods, malls, and housing areas. They know and appreciate the pleasantries of life, and express this appreciation by working hard to build and maintain it.

The descriptions of the buildings stress that they are green certified and all three cities—Kuala Lumpur a bit less so—have a clear focus on green development. There was a large conference on healthy cities in this region recently with the focus on building relationship patterns—in both suburban and urban areas—and the sort of things that we, in the U.S., talked about in model cities during the 1960s.There is great concern about the pollution in Chinese cities and south Asia wants to keep a clear focus on livability. Every business and individual is aware of sustainability issues here in a respectful way.

Greening Miami

Every time I drive through downtown Miami, it strikes me how much the skyline's changed during the past 25 years.

The sparse city center forever immortalized in the 1980s by Miami Vice is now a mega-metropolis densely populated by condos and skyscrapers—monolithic structures of steel, concrete, and glass glistening off the waters of Biscayne Bay in the hot sun.

And they continue to rise, year after year.

What I—along with several thousands of other Miamians—didn't know was that most of these new edifices are eco-friendly. From energy-saving reflective roofs and air-conditioning systems to lights that adjust themselves depending on the amount of daylight entering their heat-dispersing windows, downtown Miami's greening.

Who knew?

I mean, really.