Problems with a Life of Their Own

DEFINITION

Examples

Any market based phenomenon

A sour corporate culture

Difficulty attracting talent in a tight labor market

Oscillations in complex supply chains

Quarter-end spikes in customer demand that pose tremendous burdens on all involved

Increasing the size of sales force leads to reduced sales volume

[more detail]

Whenever we have a large number of actors, each pursuing their own notion of “success”, there is a potential for Problems with a Life of Their Own. Such complex adaptive systems typically show emergent behavior, which is neither predictable from the actions of individuals, nor is it necessarily the intent of the actors. This emergent quality means the system has its own momentum and integrity. It is often mysterious to those involved, even to those trying their hardest to modify or "lead" the system.

The “problem” and the ”solution” are recursively linked; one cannot be defined or explored without impacting the other. There are perplexing circular causal chains, often with time lags that mask the tie between cause and effect. As a result, the effects of change efforts are often unpredictable and even out of proportion to the effort.

Change efforts cannot be withdrawn. There is no experimentation; any changes alter the system in irreversible ways. There is often mysterious resistance to even obviously beneficial change.

The “change agents” are in the system, not outside of it; therefore their behavior (even their curiosity) is an event which changes the system. Executives who believe they are "in charge" often make decisions which are ill-timed or capricious, which only sends the system into more dramatic reactions. In reality they do not run the system; they only ride it.

In organizations, problems of this sort most commonly result from the difference between the formal, purposive systems of the organization vs. the informal, emergent systems that are outside our conscious intent or control. For example, the organizational chart specifies who can talk to whom, and who can give orders to whom; in contrast to that formal statement, there is an informal network of friendships, car pool partners, members of the company soccer team, parents in PTA programs, frat buddies, and all manner of other links that create an entirely different network by which get things done..and even figure out what to work on. There are other types of systems that contribute to the complexity of organizations.

CHALLENGES

Careful analysis tempered by humility; making change efforts in a system that is ultimately unknowable.

The ability to see systems, much less deal with them effectively, is relatively rare. We typically prefer to believe we are the observer and somehow separate from the observed; systems remind us that we are a part of the very thing we are hoping to observe. Even our awareness of our membership in the system becomes part of the system. There is no neutral point from which to gain an objective understanding.

This does not mean we must work without any understanding. Parts of the system are often clear; the repetitive and insistent emergence of symptoms is often painfully obvious to all. We can work backwards from there to identify a few of the key causal loops. It will still require some deep reflection and analysis, since complex systems often have both circular causal loops as well as time lags between cause and symptom. The low morale in June in the Installation Department could be the result of a new Department Head in Sales back in January who insisted on volume without any concern for thorough documentation of customer requirements.

Some situations are merely puzzling to us, so we may be tempted to apply the term 'system', but it is more out of our own ignorance than a real understanding of the phenomenon. Work process problems, for example, often present as complex systems simply because outcomes are below what we would expect given the talent and commitment of all the participants to a quality result. Our lack of understanding, however, may eventually fade away with straightforward process characterization, and the problem appears properly as a Puzzle, not a Problem with a Life of its Own

OUTCOMES

System problems are not "solved", they are explored.

You can't drive a system, but you can tease it.

The key players respect the complexity of the system, and its independence of any rational or authoritative intent. Their change efforts are temperate and partial, that is, they leave room for the system to act and react to any behavior before rushing ahead.

They pursue an iterative cycle of discovery, design, and implementation that "nudges" the system rather than comprehensive attempts to control or drive it. Solutions emerge out of the system rather than being imposed on it.

Often there is some healthy behavior somewhere in the system; it is easier to nurture existing positive behavior than it is to introduce new behaviors. The best outcome may be the one already existing, but dismissed as an "exception".