Linkages matter

August 15, 2019

F4a7859e 9343 4351 b9c9 40639f080a5f copy

Working in complexity you soon get a sense of which ideas and concepts are causing (sic) people problems.  One is the whole dispositional v causal aspect on which I have written several times, most recently at the end of 2017.  Another equally problematic issue is to get people to realise that how things connect is more important that the nature of the things themselves; especially true when you are trying to change attitudes and beliefs or, god help us all, mindsets.

I think one of the reasons for this is the dominance of individuals, or more precisely social atomism in the anglo-saxon with its change the individual to change the system mantra.  I wrote a lengthy post on this over a decade ago for those who want to dive deeper in to the background.

 Another reason is the rapid, and to my mind mistaken, growth of psychometric testing that was an intimate part of the systems dynamics driven change on organisational design of which the likes of Senge were initiators, or rather perpetrators.  Myers-Briggs is now pretty much established as a pseudo-science (if you don’t believe me go and check the literature) but it dominates many an organisation as do various other bits of hokum classifying people into colours and the like.   All of these are about putting people into boxes, seeing your human ‘assets’ as things which can be classified and deployed in the same way as machine tools or spare parts.

In reality who and what people interact with has a higher impact and is a more ethical change mechanism.  It seems perfectly reasonable for an organisation to change the dynamics of interaction between employees, far less ethnical to try and tell them what sort of people they should be.   Years ago I developed social network stimulation as a constraint based approach to self-organising teams, task focused activities leading to behaviour and attitudinal change as an indirect not a direct consequence.  More recently I’ve creating a lighter version of that with the parallel deployment of trios (three people from different backgrounds) to identify solutions to intractable problems.   In all cases we have changed what people call ‘mindset’ not by talking about it, but by doing something that changes people interactions with others and their environments.   Linkages are a type of constraint and its much easier to influence a complex system by constraint management than by agent manipulation and end state definition.

As a side bar, I’d be interested what other complexity ideas people find difficult to get, or to explain – this could be a series 








Photo by Puvida Productions on Unsplash

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent Posts

About the Cynefin Company

The Cynefin Company (formerly known as Cognitive Edge) was founded in 2005 by Dave Snowden. We believe in praxis and focus on building methods, tools and capability that apply the wisdom from Complex Adaptive Systems theory and other scientific disciplines in social systems. We are the world leader in developing management approaches (in society, government and industry) that empower organisations to absorb uncertainty, detect weak signals to enable sense-making in complex systems, act on the rich data, create resilience and, ultimately, thrive in a complex world.

Cognitive Edge Ltd. & Cognitive Edge Pte. trading as The Cynefin Company and The Cynefin Centre.


Social Links: The Cynefin Company
Social Links: The Cynefin Centre
< Prev

Avoiding paralysis in major change

- No Comments

Over the last three weeks I’ve been engaged in a diverse set of projects.  Firstly ...

More posts

Next >

Mapping, sensing and hacking

- No Comments

On an impulse the other day I set up a book club for Cynefin Centre ...

More posts

linkedin facebook pinterest youtube rss twitter instagram facebook-blank rss-blank linkedin-blank pinterest youtube twitter instagram