St David’s 2025: 4/5 Clear Frame

In the penultimate post in this series, we move on to the clear domain.  It is worth reminding people that Clear and Complicated are both aspects of order and the boundary between them, unlike the phase shifts between order, complex, chaotic and in a different way aporetic.  Moving things to the clear domain is also a final move on Cynefin Dynamics, not one of continuous change.   The danger of overconstraining is ever present, and the collapse into chaos as a consequence (the catastrophic fold in Cynefin) is the main risk.  

However, the whole point of the clear domain is to ensure compliance with best practices, so enforcement is one dimension that can range from accepting tradeoffs to pragmatism (just getting the job done), with the danger of zombie-like enforcement if you take this too far. Another name for this is the British colloquialism of a jobsworth.  The response of those subject to the rules is also critical and forms our second dimension, ranging from questioning to pragmatic acceptance. Still, if it leads to indifference or resignation, we have problems.  There are two legitimate states: ARE YOU SURE, the entry point, and then STABLE BEST PRACTICE; everything else is a warning at best, dangerous to the point of failure at worst.

So, following the same format as the last two posts, I’ll use the response dimension to describe the nine overall approaches.

Any shift to clear involves some form of trade-off.

I can drive on the left or the right of the road, but I accept that each country makes its own decision, and I comply.  The same is true in organisations; I might do many things differently, but the need for efficiency means I will compromise in most cases.  So here the three states are:

• The energy of shifting to best practices is high, so initially, we will be questioning whether it is the right decision: ARE YOU SURE?  
• If people are still unhappy but prepared to accept, then it makes sense to NEGOTIATE and be open to discovering the need for exceptions or the possibility that it’s not yet ready to shift.
• The real danger signs are when you enter the SYCOPHANT ZONE, in which everyone wants to agree that whatever the boss wants to do is the right thing.  If you have created that atmosphere, you have eliminated the weak signal generation that will warn you of impending failure, and you should open up to anonymous feedback (we have a new non-whistleblower, whistleblowing capability in SenseMaker®). You have a more substantial and threatening situation if it’s part of organisational culture.

Pragmatism or just getting the job done

At this stage, we can still recover from all three states, which are:

• If people continue questioning the decision to shift, and it is evidence-based, then you may have moved too quickly, so ENGAGE AND LISTEN. This is similar to negotiation but may involve some form of ethnographic study. The questioning may not make much sense unless you understand the work, and that is not going to be achieved by listening alone. You need to engage (and here ethnographic approaches work best)  with the reality of day-to-day practice.
• The goal is STABLE BEST PRACTICE, which combines pragmatic acceptance with an organisational focus on getting the job done.
• If the questioning continues and there is no evidence to back it up, then it is a simple matter of CHALLENGE THEN FIRE. But be careful. Any challenge is a weak signal, so check and double-check before you take drastic action.

Zombie-like enforcement …

… should always be avoided, but it isn’t always malicious; it may just be seeing people as a nuisance: We put all this investment into creating neat and tidy ‘manageable’ systems, and now these people are messing things up.  It is worth asking what level of dissent you allow and how engaged the whole workforce was (consultation is not engagement) before you assume you are not one of the undead. An occupational hazard for Personnel and Finance, not to mention IT.

 The three states are:

• If people persist in questioning what you are doing or engage in open acts of defiance, instead of decrying their lack of commitment to a common purpose or goal, realise that THE CYNICS CARE enough to risk isolation or punishment to tell you things about the system.  If you complain about cynicism, aside from the fact that you probably don’t get Diogenes’ point about authority (I love his response to Alexander the Great), unlike the Stoics, the Cynics stood up to it.  But more importantly, it’s an early indication that you may be dead to humanity, and about to be reanimated through a certification scheme, a modern form of Vodou.
• More dangerous is if people appear to comply but are GAMING THE SYSTEM, an art form in IBM, where mindless bureaucracy was often the rule, not the exception.  This means you may think everything is fine and dandy when, in fact, the system is starting to break down.   If knowing the right people is essential to finding ways around the rules, then you have a real problem, and this can be disclosed by techniques such as decision mapping, which is enhanced with SenseMaker in Genba form.
• If you combine zombie-like enforcement with indifference, then the system has OSSIFIED & WILL FAILcatastrophically with little chance of recovery.

There are three main dynamic movements through the clear.  The first, which can be two-way, is from complicated, through the are you sure ” checkpoint, to stable best practice.  But of course, you could fail to negotiate and only employ sycophants, as anyone who defies you will be fired. Then you fail (there are political and organisational examples here).  You could also ignore the cynics, resulting in gaming behaviour and again, catastrophic failure.   It’s your choice, but the people who are not on message have value if you are prepared to listen and take action.   Medieval Kings used to visit the taverns anonymously to hear how they were viewed, and there are modern equivalents for organisations to stay sensitive to reality.  Given the Stockholm Syndrome relationship between many consultants and OD departments with C Level, you may have to break a few shackles to achieve this.

The banner picture

With a good forecast, I returned to Coniston to tackle the six Wainwrights in route 18. The narrow road up to the Walna Scar car park is always interesting, and the first time I walked down it, I fell a couple of times on black ice; it’s not a road to take in winter but it does have the benefit of the Sun Inn at the bottom which is good place to stay and also eat: another walker’s Inn, the tourists tend to stay in the Centre of town.  Driving from the south up the lake, you get to see Peel Island, which is a place of pilgrimage for those brought up on Swallows and Amazons.  Coniston is also associated with Donald Campbell, who died there attempting a water speed record – I was 13 going on 14 at the time and still remember the news item.   He stayed at the Sun Inn, as did Anthony Hopkins when he played Campbell in the 1988 film Across the Lake.  The town is also associated with Ruskin, a Victorian social pioneer who believed in art’s power to transform lives.  Carlyle said of him, “There is nothing going on among us as notable to me as these fierce lightning-bolts Ruskin is copiously and desperately pouring into the black world of anarchy all around him. No other man in England that I meet has in him the divine rage against iniquity, falsity & baseness that Ruskin has, and that every man ought to have”. The museum is worth a visit, as is the town and the whole area.

But today my first goal was the long, gradual climb to the final scramble to the summit of Dow Crag, then in a quick session, Coniston Old Man and Brim Fell, before tracking to the summit of Grey Friar (neglected but wonderful views) in strong winds.   Lunch there sheltered behind a rocky outcrop before Great Carrs and Swirl How.  Then the steep and knee-jarring descent to Levers Water and the long walk back to the car park.   I usually do this walk in reverse, with bad knees, it’s better to go up steeply and come down gradually, but I am faithful to the guidebook.  The banner picture shows the view over the edge to the tourist path up from Low Water from the transit between Coniston Old Man and Brim Fell.   Others and I persuaded a distraught couple from attempting to scramble over this to recover their dog, who had gone down to chase some sheep.  Not having a dog on a lead at lambing time is a sin; farmers are fully entitled to shoot them, but the best advice we could give was to follow the tourist track down and hope to recover it there.  Walking back to the car park, a Mountain Rescue vehicle slowed down, and I thought at first that the idiots had ignored our advice and ended up crag-fast or worse, but they were looking for the dog!  The report says it all, and if you want a picture of the dog, it’s here: 

Incident 5 of 2025:-

09/03/25, 16:17, Old Man of Coniston, SD272978

It was a warm and sunny Spring day. A woman was walking with her dog, which unfortunately had run off at the top of the Old Man. After searching for a while, she asked for our help through Cumbria Police. We despatched two Land Rovers and searched until it began to get dark, with plans to resume in the morning. However, when we dropped the owner back at her vehicle in the centre of the village, the missing dog was waiting beside it. In most cases, this is where we would expect a lost dog to make for. However, because the car was parked in the village and members of the party had returned there earlier, it was discounted. Full marks to the dog for navigating gates and a road safely back there.

9 volunteer team members attended, for just under 3 hours

The tourist mountains—Yr Wyddfa is one, the Old Man another—attract more than their fair share of poorly equipped walkers. The mountain Rescue teams comprise volunteers; call-outs are increasing, so they need support.  They, and the mountains, deserve respect.

By way of full disclosure, this series was written and posted in late April, not early March