Complexity is checkmated by “clarity,” the deliberate effort to make “sense of the chaos.” In complex situations, leaders need to make sure to collaborate with others and stop seeking permanent solutions. To paraphrase an old adage, don’t let “perfect” become the enemy of “good enough.”
And ambiguity is matched by “agility,” the ability of a leader to communicate across people and organizations instantly and to move quickly in applying solutions. When confronted by ambiguity, leaders need to listen well, think divergently, and set up incremental dividends. This is captured in the concept of “wirearchy,” as opposed to “hierarchy” — where social networks that allow you to engage the insights of many trump the brilliance of any one person.
As the world has become more complex and turbu
VUCA is an acronym used by the American Military to describe extreme conditions in Afghanistan and Iraq. It stands for Volatile, Uncertain, Complex and Ambiguous.
This terminology is resonating with an increasing number of CEOs as we try to make sense of the constantly changing challenges brought on by politics, economics, society and the environment.
We seem to be shifting from an approach based around problem solving and planning aimed at reducing uncertainty, to a world where progress is made by actively
…show more content…
The normal layperson’s usage of the complexity tends to oversimplify the scope of practical problems facing leaders in organizations. I encourage you to examine Dave Snowden’s Cynefin framework (see nearby image copied from Wikipedia). In that framework, complexity is the relationship between cause and effect. It can only be perceived in retrospect, but not in advance. In this condition, the organization uses an agile approach of probe, sense, and respond. Complexity differs from “complicated.” A complicated issue can be understood by analysis and investigation