=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-2010/paper10
|storemode=property
|title=The Cynefin Framework And The Technical Leadership: How To Handle The Complexity
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2010/paper10.pdf
|volume=Vol-2010
|authors=Davide Fierro,Stefano Putino,Lucio Tirone
|dblpUrl=https://dblp.org/rec/conf/ciise/FierroPT17
}}
==The Cynefin Framework And The Technical Leadership: How To Handle The Complexity==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2010/paper10.pdf
The Cynefin Framework and the Technical
Leadership: How to Handle the Complexity
Davide Fierro, Stefano Putino Lucio Tirone
INAF – National Institute for Astrophysics Aster S.p.A.
Rome, Italy Rome, Italy
davide.fierro@inaf.it lucio.tirone@aster-te.it
stefano.putino@inaf.it
Copyright © held by the author.
I. SYSTEMS THINKING
Abstract — The current socio-economical context is affected by
extremely challenging factors such as the macro-economic crisis,
the globalization of markets, the exponential growth in the A significant number of modern enterprises qualify as
complexity of systems, the continuous evolution of technologies complex. Their operational environment may change in short
and the criticality of requirements subject to rapid and sometimes and irregular, unpredictable cycles, requiring the involved
uncontrollable evolution. organizations to adapt internally in order to avoid degradation.
In such a competitive landscape the role of the future leaders Systems science asserts that the optimal way to fully
gets essential. They shall be able, by means of a holistic, understand why a problem or element occurs and persists, is to
methodologically structured and flexible approach, to drive their understand its parts in relation to the whole. Systems thinking
programs through the implementation of the complex changes encourages understanding systems by examining the links and
which are strategic to preserve the competitiveness. Such new interactions among the elements that compose their entirety. The
leaders must be endowed with both strong technical skills, traditional, reductionist analytical approach to management is
continuously trained in the key reference standards, and soft skills, often counter-productive, since such analysis can only provide
useful for the strategic understanding of the evolutionary
an understanding of the individual parts, while a holistic
processes expressed by the markets and for the improvement of
approach can be considerably more insightful for the
the complex relationships efficiency with the relevant
stakeholders. understanding of the whole system. Systems thinking develops
around a wide number of concepts which can provide the
The development and implementation of optimized technical- modern leader with the right tools for understanding complexity,
managerial solutions is therefore essential, vital for the among which some of the most relevant are:
"feasibility" and competitiveness of front-running projects, and
• The analysis of behavioral patterns, which arise when
cannot succeed without a contextual analysis of the reference
scenarios.
the attention is placed on the way in which the parts
work together, rather than on the parts themselves;
In this context the Cynefin Framework, an interpretative • The analysis of the purpose which the system is
model of the different levels of the systems complexity, ranging conceived to achieve, which is always a property of the
from order to disorder, can provide a very effective support.
whole and not found in any of the single parts;
The goal of this paper is to develop a multi-faceted and • The analysis of emergent behavior, which is exposed
comprehensive vision of the problems in the various domains of by the system when un-expected and un-experienced
complexity, "contextualizing" the most effective management interactions occur among its parts, with typically
approaches and "soft and hard" skills of the leader. negative consequences to be mitigated, but sometimes
even positive consequences that can be exploited as
Keywords — Cynefin Framework, Technical Leadership,
opportunities for innovation;
Systems Engineering, Management Strategies, Decision Support
Systems, Uncertainty • The analysis of the system context, which provides an
understanding on the system scope and of its
environment, which is the main concern of the present
document.
1
II. THE CYNEFIN FRAMEWORK between cause and effect, and the way forward is determined on
the basis of emerging patterns. This is a world represented by
pattern-based management.
A constructive help to better understand and manage the
complexity of systems is provided by the Cynefin Framework, The Cynefin Framework therefore can help executives and
developed between 1999 and 2003 by Snowden and Kurtz on leaders to better understand what kinds of tools, approaches,
the basis of studies initiated by Boisot and Cilleris. The Cynefin processes, or methods are more likely to be effective in any given
Framework is an interpretative model of the different levels of situation.
complexity in which the systems can exist, ranging from order As well as from the complexity point of view, the Cynefin
to disorder through five different contexts (or domains): simple, can also be seen from the uncertainty point of view, as Hugh
complicated, complex, chaotic and disordered. This framework Courtney explain in "Strategy Under Uncertainty", a framework
helps leaders to identify the reference context in which their for determining the level of uncertainty surrounding strategic
decisions have to take place, and suggests the proper courses of decisions. He talks about a clear-enough future, alternate
actions and operating logics to be applied. futures, a range of futures and true ambiguity. These levels of
uncertainty can be associated with the Cynefin domains because
increasing the complexity of the systems also increases
uncertainty about the strategies to follow, as we will see in the
next paragraphs.
III. SIMPLE CONTEXT: THE DOMAIN OF BEST
PRACTICE
Simple problems often have a solution that appears to be
immediate, to which we respond with actions or precise rules
without even thinking about it too much. In this domain, we
know exactly what is the question, and what is the optimal
answer to solve a problem. This is due to stability and clear
cause-and-effect relationships that are easily discernible by
everyone, and which characterize the Simple Context.
Often, the right answer is self-evident and undisputed
Fig. 1. Cynefin domains
because in the Simple Context decisions are unquestioned and
all parties share an understanding. This is referred to as the realm
Cynefin is not a categorization framework, (useful to of the “known knowns”, meaning that all relevant aspects
classify data in a predefined taxonomic scheme), but it is a necessary to solve a problem are well understood, and that we
sense-making framework developed from already existing data have full information available about each of them. The effort to
(experience) trying to build a representative model of them. It is be put in place can then be devoted to the identification of the
important to underline that no one domain is more desirable than optimal solution.
any other.
The Cynefin Framework is used primarily to understand the
dynamics of situations, decisions, perspectives, conflicts, and
changes in order to come to a consensus for decision-making. In
fact, it is rare even for a leader to be able to know everything that
should be known, but it is still necessary to make sufficient sense
of what’s going on around us, in order to act appropriately in
response.
On the basis of what has been described above, a good leader
should first identify the prevailing operating context, in order to
make appropriate choices. Obviously, each domain requires a
series of different actions and behaviors for the implementation
of the most appropriate approach to solve the problem. For
example, in the Cynefin Framework, simple and complicated
contexts assume an ordered universe, where cause-and-effect Fig. 2. Simple domain
relationships are perceivable, and right answers can be
determined based on the facts, so this is the world of fact-based
management. Complex and chaotic contexts instead are In other words, the Simple Context can also be seen as the
unordered, there is no immediately apparent relationship domain of the ordered and obvious. This is the domain of
2
process engineering, in which knowledge is captured and same time. Based on that, a leader operating in simple contexts
embedded in structured processes to ensure consistency and can apply this approach successfully. The strengths of sequential
optimize performance. As an example, areas that are subject to methods are predictability, stability, repeatability, and high
little change, or activities with orderly processing and assurance. Process improvement focuses on increasing process
fulfillment, usually belong here. capability through standardization, measurement, and control.
These methods rely on the “master plans” to anchor their
A. Dominant managerial, methodology and leaderhip style processes and provide project-wide communication. Specific
As suggested by the name of the context is simple, for a attention is given to the completeness of documentation,
leader, organize the management of information and procedures traceability from requirements, and verification processes. It is
to apply to the entire system in three easy steps: sense, very simple to understand and use. In a waterfall model, each
categorize, and respond. phase must be completed fully before the next phase can begin.
At the end of each phase, a review takes place to determine if
the project is on the right path and whether or not to continue or
discard the project. The major risks are related to the usually
long implementation that could result in changing
expectations/requirements and consequent technical
obsolescence.
Fig. 2. Simple managerial style
This is the domain of best practice so the focus is on
efficiency. Simple contexts, properly assessed, require top-down
management and monitoring, so we recognize a rigid and strict
bureaucratic managerial style in which leaders and managers
make use of prescriptive management techniques, relying on
explicit knowledge which is captured and encoded in systems,
processes, procedures as well as guidelines or manuals. As
displayed in Fig. 3 the strategic direction and style of a leader in Fig.4. Sequential Approach
this context can be summarized as follows: command-and-
control style, clear lines of authority and little ambiguity; B. Risks
decisions can be easily delegated, and functions are automated;
the networking is less important. In each context examined in this discussion in addition to
pragmatic view of issues and emerging guidelines, we will
The “obvious” approach is usually an operative process. illustrate possible risks arising from poor management and
Leaders and managers can develop a single forecast of the future leadership.
that is precise enough for strategic development, as Courtney
says. The residual uncertainty is irrelevant to making strategic While typically quite effective, the hierarchical approach to
decisions because the forecast, or answer, is sufficiently narrow obvious work is not entirely risk free. In fact, in this domain key
to point to a single direction, like an arrow. risks are mis-categorization, resistance to change, entrenched
thinking and complacency.
An example of situation relating to everyday life attributable
to this domain are heavily process-oriented situations, such as Mis–categorization involves performing the wrong
administrations or production lines. procedure. Issues may be incorrectly classified within this
domain because they have been oversimplified. Leaders who
The selection, implementation and use of a dedicated constantly ask for condensed information, regardless of the
systems development life cycle model by an organization complexity of the situation, particularly run this risk.
depends on several factors such as the nature and complexity of
the system and the stability of system requirements. Therefore, Leaders are also susceptible to entrained thinking, a
the guidelines of the Cynefin theory could help the leader to conditioned response that occurs when people are blinded to
apply the most effective and efficient methodology depending new ways of thinking by the perspectives they acquired through
on the context in which the system is located in. For each past experience, training, and success. It can be helpful for a
context, we describe a methodology that best suits the domain in leader to consider, in dynamics, the “entrainment breaking”
question by applying specific processes, methods and movement in order to soft the entrenched thinking.
techniques. These are waterfall, incremental and evolutionary Third, when things appear to be going smoothly, leaders
model. often become complacent. If the context changes at that point, a
In simple domains the most performing methodology is the leader is likely to miss what is happening and react too late. In
waterfall model because it is a sequential design process that is the Cynefin Framework, the simple domain lies adjacent to the
most effective and efficient for engineering systems where the chaotic for good reason. The most frequent collapses into chaos
requirements are well known and stable or for updates to occur because success has bred complacency. This shift can
existing systems. It consists of performing the development bring about catastrophic failure.
process a single time. Simplistically: determine user needs, Johari window and ADKAR model, for example, suggest
define requirements, design the system, implement the system, how leaders can mitigate or soft these risks.
test, fix, and deliver. All system capabilities are delivered at the
3
IV. COMPLICATED CONTEXT: “ANALYZE” VS. In Complicated Contexts leaders should be able to think
“CATEGORIZE” analytically and methodically by making use of experiments,
skills, surveys and planning scenarios. As we have seen, the
reductionism helps experts, like systems engineers or project
Complicated contexts, unlike simple ones, may contain managers, to break a project down into smaller packages, so
several right answers, and though there is a clear relationship different teams will take care of those lower complexity tasks in
between cause and effect, not everyone can see it, so this is the order to get them able to achieve their objectives more easily.
ordered – not-obvious domain of experts. Reductionism can be applied not only in project management (to
derive the work breakdown structures, WBS), but also to steer a
business analysis, where the market landscape is modeled into
several interacting actors that play their role in the value chain
as well as to fragment a complex architecture into subordinate
components.
This is the domain of experts. While leaders in a simple
context must sense, categorize, and respond, those in a
complicated context must sense, analyze, and respond and
often expert’s opinion is required and, so, the networking gets
strategically important. Deep knowledge and experience are
beneficial as they improve the leader’s analysis skills. Due to the
complicated context calls for investigating several options, good
practice, as opposed to best practice, is more appropriate. The
future can be described as one of a few discrete scenarios. From
the uncertainty point of view possible outcomes are discrete and
Fig. 5. Complicated domain clear.
The Methodology is the base in this domain, which seeks to Given the nature of complicated systems, the most
identify cause–effect relationships through the assessment of performing methodology is the “incremental” strategy, much
several solutions. This is referred to as the realm of the “known more flexible with respect to the sequential one. This approach
unknowns”, meaning that all relevant aspects necessary to solve determines user needs and defines the system requirements, then
the problem are well understood, even though we don’t have full performs the rest of the development in a sequence of builds.
information available about all of them. In this case the effort to The first build incorporates part of the planned capabilities; the
be put in place is devoted to the analysis and next build adds more capabilities, and so on, until the system is
tradeoff/optimization of different alternative solutions. complete. It generally applies to organizations that market new
versions of a product at regular or preplanned intervals to remain
As in the simple context, any approach is governed by competitive in the marketplace. Milestones are established at
standard rules, procedures, protocols manuals etc. Complicated planned intervals to introduce a planned version of the system
is the domain of reductionism. Is possible, in fact, to break a that can be released to the market. The system realized as a result
system down into constituent parts, because the solution of of the concept stage can be a first version. Typically, the overall
individual sub-systems leading to the entire solution. Work capabilities of the last version can be known at the start of system
breakdown structures (WBS) are an example. An advantage is implementation. However, a limited set of capabilities is
that lower entity issues are easier to handle, with a lesser degree allocated to the first release. With each successive version, more
of articulation. Individual sub-systems have a low interaction capabilities are added until the last release fully incorporates the
between them, although all works together within the same overall capabilities.
system, their functioning and behavior is quite independent so
modifying one of them neighbors have low or limited
repercussions. Moreover, the decomposition and recomposition
process can not only solve full problem, but also optimize the
system by adjusting the functioning of all its sub–systems. "The
whole is the sum of the parts" is an assumed "obvious", but
suitable for defining a complicated system.
A. Dominant managerial, methodology and leaderhip style
Fig.7. Incremental Approach
Fig. 6. Complicated managerial style B. Risks
Key risks here are over-thinking, over-analysis and once
again entrenched thinking. Over–analysis is the result of a desire
to make the “right” choice among a few viable options. Taken
4
to an extreme, over-analysis leads to “analysis paralysis”, where subsystems may not work, or work in a completely different way
a group of experts hits a stalemate, unable to agree on any when it is separated from the whole system. As a consequence
answers because of each individual’s entrained thinking, or ego. leaders who try to impose order in a complex context will fail.
Entrained thinking is a danger in complicated contexts, but it is
the experts (rather than the leaders) who are prone to it, and they A. Dominant managerial, methodology and leaderhip style
tend to dominate the domain. When this problem occurs, This is the domain of complexity, which studies how patterns
innovative suggestions by nonexperts may be overlooked or emerge through the interaction of many sub–systems. Emergent
dismissed, resulting in lost opportunities. To get around this patterns can be perceived but not predicted, understanding why
issue, a leader must listen to the experts while simultaneously things happen only in retrospect. Leaders are in front of a range
welcoming novel thoughts and solutions from others. of potential futures. That range is defined by a limited number
of key variables, but the actual outcome may lie anywhere.
Like simple context, Johari window and ADKAR model can There are no natural discrete scenarios under uncertainty point
be helpful to mitigate or soft these risks. of view, like complicated contexts. In this domain, it is very
important to allow the growth of the players networking as
displayed in the following organization structure.
V. COMPLEX CONTEXT: THE DOMAIN OF
EMERGENCE
Unfortunately, most of human activities are not amenable to
a "just" complicated model that is made up of individual sub–
systems together. Unlike complicated contexts where is possible Fig. 9. Complex managerial style
to know at least one right answer, in a complex context right
answers can’t be easily ferreted out.
A leader should patiently allow the path forward to reveal
Complex Context is the realm of the “unknown knowns”, itself instead of attempting to impose a course of action, to create
meaning that we are aware that there are relevant aspects related probes to make the patterns or potential patterns more visible
to the problem which are not well understood, and little before taking any action. After that he should respond by
information is available about the problem itself. The effort to stabilizing desired patterns and destabilizing those he does not
be put in place is then devoted to try to understand the right want. So, the best leader approach is probe, sense and then
questions, even if often the answers are only available in respond. Leaders allow patterns to emerge, and determine
hindsight. which ones are desirable will succeed. In this way, they will
discern many opportunities for creativity, new business models
So, another way to call this domain is: unordered–obvious in
and innovation. Fail fast, learn fast and safe fail is the right
hindsight; it’s only after the fact that we can understand why
way to do innovation.
things happen. Once that happened, the event is rationalized in
retrospect. As further reading the “black swan” theory is In this domain is impossible to do detailed planning because
suggested. it would only be a waste of time. Managers and leaders should
be able to manage and lead in a strategic environment which is
emergent and uncertain and therefore need the ability to envision
their system in a “larger” one within which it exists at a given
time. It is essential to have an iterative, incremental development
with holistic and synthesis skills. Open discussions, where
people generate innovative ideas to help leaders in decisions and
strategies are welcome. Dissent and diversity are encouraged to
push the emergence of well-forged patterns and ideas. Leaders
shall manage starting conditions and monitor for emergence
because outcomes are unpredictable in a complex context. In
short leaders could follow guidelines close to the systems
engineering methodology called evolutionary. The
“evolutionary” strategy develops a system in builds but differs
from the incremental strategy, previously described, in
acknowledging that the user need is not fully understood and not
all requirements can be defined up front. In this strategy, user
Fig. 8. Complex domain needs and system requirements are partially defined up front,
and then are refined in each succeeding build.
Structurally, a complex system is composed of highly
interconnected sub–systems between them: a single one is The evolutionary approach generally applies to
closely linked to neighboring, and depends on the interaction organizations that market new versions of a product at regular or
preplanned intervals. Initially the requirements for the system
that is established between them. Therefore, it is difficult, if not
impossible, apply the concept of reductionism because are partially defined and then refined with each successive
version of the system as lessons learned from the use of an early
5
version are translated into new desired capabilities. In this case, machines, assuming people as parts of machines-mindless
implementation of new versions could be done serially or in extensions of impersonal processes.
parallel with partial overlapping. As with versions developed
Adaptive leadership provides practical steps to maximize the
using the incremental approach, different versions can be
operated and supported in parallel. Particular care should be chances of success. A way is not treating a new adaptive
challenge in complex domains as a “complicated” technical
taken, however, to maintain configuration control of each
version so that operation, training and support procedures are problem. In the latter attention is mainly focused on activities,
job descriptions are detailed and constraining, roles are rigid,
appropriate to the version being used. Often, a new version with
enhanced capabilities could replace an earlier version, or a block policies are mostly oriented toward control what people can't do.
In adaptive challenges, instead, attention is focused on value-
modification can be made to the earlier version to incorporate
the new capabilities of a later version. added outcomes, job descriptions are intentionally broad to
allow flexibility, roles are fluid and policies encourage people to
As told before this approach applies mainly to complex take a "can do" mindset to find solutions.
systems for which, obviously, requirements are not well
Complicated matters, as technical problems, have solutions
understood even though the need for the system is understood
and approved. Customer feedback could be used to enhance the in the current know-how through the organization’s current
structures, procedures, and ways of doing things. Differently
capabilities of a future version of the system and it allows to take
advantage of emerging technologies. adaptive challenges can only be addressed through changes in
people’s priorities, beliefs, habits and loyalties. Making progress
An example of evolutionary approach is the Incremental requires going beyond an authoritative expertise to mobilize
Commitment Spiral Model (ICSM), shown below. discovery, shedding certain entrenched ways, tolerating losses,
and generating the new capacity to thrive anew even if this
inevitably causes resistance to change.
As representative model of adaptive leadership methodology
we can consider the OODA loop. John R. Boyd, a military
strategist and United States Air Force Colonel, conceived the
OODA loop that is a structured pattern of observation,
orientation, decision, and action. In the first step leaders collect
data by means of the senses; then make an analysis and synthesis
of data to form one's current mental perspective; determine a
course of action based on one's current mental perspective and
finally they act with the physical playing-out of decisions.
Fig.10. Spiral Model
The main characteristics of the three engineering life cycle
models previously described are synthesized in the figure below:
Fig. 12. OODA loop
This is a loop because, of course, while this is taking place,
the situation may be changing. Sometimes it is necessary to
Fig.11. Summary of Strategy Characteristics cancel a planned action in order to meet the changes by adopting
an adaptive mindset.
a) Adaptive Leadership Another model, quite similar to the OODA loop previously
The unpredictability and the complexity previously analyzed analyzed, consists of three elements: observing events and
call for a new type of leadership. Organizations are capable of patterns, interpreting what we are observing and intervening to
intelligent, purposeful collective action, actions taken to address the adaptive change.
influence their environments in desired directions. Like all living
organisms, organizations can learn, adapt and grow. They too
have life cycles of birth, growth, maturity and eventual decline.
Organizations are living systems, being composed not just of
capital goods and technology, but of people.
Adaptive leadership impacts the environment. It addresses a
very active form of leadership, not a passive effort taken merely
to adjust to circumstances as found. It is a new approach far from
Fig. 13. Adaptive leadership model
the traditional and ancient way to lead organizations as
6
In exercising adaptive leadership, the goal is to make VI. CHAOTIC CONTEXT: THE DOMAIN OF RAPID
observing as objective as possible. Getting off the dance floor RESPONSE
and onto the balcony is a powerful way to do this. It enables
leaders to gain some distance and see patterns in what is
happening that are hard to observe if they are stuck at the In the Chaotic Context, the relationships between cause and
ground-floor level. Once observed a leader must holds more than effect are impossible to determine because they shift constantly
one interpretation having the ability to view the same set of data and no manageable patterns exist, only turbulence, so the search
from several different perspectives. The final step, intervention, for the right answers would be pointless. There are not any
should reflect leaders’ hypothesis about the problem. connection or connectivity. We are in the state of not knowing
what type of causality exists. This is an unordered domain, the
This continually self-refining iterative process is designed to
realm of unknowables.
cycle through the three stages in a particular order as the stages
build on one another. The practice of reflection (Observe and
Interpret stages) is integral to learning and leading adaptively.
Reflection is an important process by which knowledge is
developed from experience. When reflecting, a leader considers
an experience that has happened and try to understand or explain
it, which often lead to insight and deep learning, or ideas to test
on new experiences.
Adaptive leadership reflects the actions of leaders who are
proactive, foresee opportunities and put the resources in place to
go after them. They are astute students of their environments
generating creative options for action, strive to improve their
personal openness to new ideas and stay abreast by being
lifelong learners. In this way, a leader can maximize the chances
of success by minimizing failures.
Overall adaptive leadership offers an opportunity to improve
Fig.14. Chaotic domain
individual performance by offering the sensation of being
responsible and active player of the organization. This has This is referred to as the realm of the “unknown
significant influence on the motivation and commitment which unknowns”, meaning that we don’t even know which are the
the individual has for his work and for the organization as a relevant aspects related to the problem, and no information is
whole, and is a trigger for peak performance. available even to be able to define the problem. The effort to be
B. Risks put in place in this case can only be devoted to take immediate
Although with the adaptive leadership model for a leader it action, and then to try to make sense of what happened, trying to
is possible to improve the guidelines for action in complex reduce chaos.
contexts, this not excludes risks inherent in this domain. Some
of these are desire for determinism, failure to learn, revert to
simple strategies, impatience and over-control. A. Dominant managerial, methodology and leaderhip style
In a chaotic context, multiple dimensions of uncertainty
Of primary concern is the temptation to fall back into interact to create an environment that is virtually impossible to
traditional command-and-control management styles, to predict (true ambiguity in Courtney’s framework). It might not
demand safe fail business plans with defined outcomes. Leaders even be possible to identify, much less predict, all the relevant
who don’t recognize that a complex domain requires a more variables that will define the future. So, this domain requires
experimental mode of management may become impatient when immediate action by leaders and managers in order to make
they don’t seem to be achieving the results they were aiming for. sense of factors in the external and internal environment of the
They may also be scarcely able to tolerate failure, which is an company. It is not important authority, bureaucratic managerial
essential aspect of experimental understanding. If they try to style or experts networking, it is important to act as quick as
over control the organization, they will preempt the opportunity possible.
for informative patterns to emerge. Leaders who try to impose
order in a complex context will fail, but those who set the stage,
step back a bit, allow patterns to emerge, and determine which
ones are desirable will succeed. They will discern many
opportunities for innovation, creativity, and new business
models.
Fig. 15. Chaotic managerial style
Often this domain is called the "Super Hero Domain": only
a superhero can, maybe, fix the problem, enter in the burning
building and save everyone. If the super hero is not available, so
7
the best advice that can be given in these cases is run away: in the different contexts and the conditions for transition between
other words, if you understand that the project is migrating in the them. A deep understanding of context, the ability to embrace
fourth quadrant, the chaos, the best thing to do, both from an complexity and paradox, and a willingness to flexibly change
economic point of view that corporate convenience is abort the leadership style will be required for leaders who want to make
project. If this is not possible, a leader can only expect a high things happen in a time of increasing uncertainty. Emotional
probability of failure. intelligence enables technical leader to negotiate effectively
towards win-win situations. It is now clear that special skills are
This is the domain of novel practice. Here a leader must act,
required to manage systems in any context, and these are
quickly and decisively to reduce the turbulence, sense where analyzed in next paragraph.
stability is present and from where it is absent and respond by
working to transform the situation from chaos to complexity,
where the identification of emerging patterns can both help
prevent future crises that discern new opportunities. A. Leader’s Skills and Competencies
As we seen, in each scenario leader should have certain skill
The chaotic domain is nearly always the best place for and competencies to ensure a winning leadership. In this section,
leaders to impel innovation. People are more open to novelty and
we will analyze some aspects related to the leader's approaches
directive leadership in these situations than they would be in
in a specific domain.
other contexts. One excellent technique is to manage chaos and
innovation in parallel: as soon as you encounter a crisis, appoint a) Simple
a reliable manager or crisis management team to resolve the In this domain leaders can answer exactly to five Ws (What?,
issue. At the same time, pick out a separate team and focus its Who?, When?, Where? and Why?) because they have nearly all
members on the opportunities for doing things differently. If you the knowledge they need to make decisions that produce highly
wait until the crisis is over, the chance will be gone. predictable outcomes. They can observe what’s going on, sort it
into the appropriate pigeonhole and respond with tried and true
procedures. With strong authorship managers delegate and gives
VII. THE DOMAIN OF DISORDER instruction to their collaborators, communicating clearly so that
everyone knows what to do and do it in the best way. Good
communication practices and correct use of technical
The last domain is the central, the disorder, in which leaders vocabulary need particular care because this may reduce
try to interpret the same situation with different points of view. technical ambiguity but, on the other side, could create barriers
Often in a group using the Cynefin framework, leaders agree for an audience unfamiliar with the technology. Different
on what the extremes of the four domains mean in the context cultures/languages often use different words or phraseology to
they are considering, but disagree on more subtle differences convey a similar meaning. Therefore, paradoxically, a leader has
near the center of the space. As a result, individuals try to to be adaptable to understanding the communications from a
interpret the central space on the basis of their preference for diversity of technical disciplines.
action. Those most comfortable with stable order seek to create b) Complicated
or enforce rules; experts seek to conduct additional research and
Leaders operating in the complicated domain know some of
accumulate new data; politicians seek to increase the
what they need to know to make informed, effective decisions.
effectiveness of the network; and finally, the dictators, eager to
take advantage of a chaotic situation, seek absolute control. In They also know the questions they don’t have the answers to,
this domain people seem to pull issues towards the context and they have a reasonably good idea of how to find those
where they feel most empowered by their individual capabilities answers. They can’t proceed on the basis of existing knowledge,
and perspectives. so they must sense and analyze, which may point them in the
direction of searching out the information they need but don’t
have. Is necessary collaboration with other experts to analyze the
problem, doing brainstorming (it allows to express ideas and
VIII. DECISION IN MULTIPLE CONTEXTS: A LEADER’S
GUIDE comments), and give a solution. The winning leader has a
flexible mindset, perhaps doing research on the state of the art
of technology and most advanced methodologies, being open to
After a general description of five contexts of Cynefin criticism and a polyhedral view of the problem, not to conflict
framework, it is clear that a leader to be effective must be able with other experts. Once he founds the solution, he proceeds by
to shift his decision–making styles to match changing business implementing appropriate principles and processes. Therefore,
environments, adapting his managerial response depending on he should encourage contributions from various stakeholders,
the context. By correctly identifying the governing context, maintains a favorable environment that stimulates people to
staying aware of danger signals, and avoiding inappropriate provide varied contributions but keep the actors focused on a
reactions, leaders can manage effectively in a variety of common vision, harnessing their fruitful contributions. Without
situations. Good leadership requires openness to change on an this, collaboration is impossible and the resulting relationships
individual level. Truly adept leaders will know not only how to
are merely transactional. To summarize, a good leader, acting in
identify the context they are working in at any given time but
complicated domains, has an altruistic, assertive and analytical
also how to change their behavior and their decisions to match
that context. They also prepare their organization to understand mindset.
8
c) Complex A. Movement at the known-chaos boundary
In this context, the best strategy is not to consult experts. It This boundary is the strongest of the four, in which a perfect
is wise to investigate before taking action, collecting coherent boat sails very close to a devastating storm. For this reason, this
theories and ideas about what to do, and seeing the effect of a boundary is the most dangerous and, at the same time, the most
particular choice by using an agile approach, identifying, powerful if treated with respect.
understanding and mitigating risks. In complex or innovative
projects, the recognition of the emergence of unintended The devastating movement from simple to chaotic domain is
outcomes (“emergent properties”) are particularly important. called Asymmetric collapse (Item 1). Generally, enterprises
Given the rapidity of emerging pattern changes, a good leader settle into stable symmetric relationships in known space and fail
should be the main team player, a catalyst for cooperation, in to recognize that the dynamics of the environment have changed
order to be focused and meticulous while acting in complex until it is too late. The longer the period of stability and the more
systems. For this reason, it is not enough to have an analytical stable the system, the more likely it is for unexpected threats to
mindset, as complicated contexts, but a leader should think provoke a movement into chaos. The leader does not see things
ahead of current task, being visionary, pioneer, having a good that fall outside the area of his expectation, because he is
visualization of situation. He views a problem in a holistic and shortsighted and his models are outdated, bringing the system to
systemic manner, thereby enabling better understanding, better break and to fall in chaos. Chaos is not always harmful; it is also
decision making and a better solution. He should translate a space where leaders can enter into intentionally to open up new
complexity into clear operational directions. He shapes and opportunities and to create the conditions for innovation.
communicates vision and strategy simply in order to reduce Imposition (Item 2) is the forceful movement from chaotic to
system complexity. simple domain. The consequence of asymmetric collapse is
d) Chaotic chaos, and the consequence of chaos is frequently imposition of
order. In catastrophic situations, as the price of order, are usually
A leader must become a “super hero” with courage and an tolerated conditions that would has previously been
exceptional character. To entice the crowd to follow him, he unacceptable. The problem with this dynamic is that it
must be determined to act decisively and quickly as possible to introduces a new rigid stability that often breaks in its turn.
avoid the "collapse" and try to move the system to simple or
complex domain. These attributes are the ones that help progress B. Movement at the known-knowable boundary
the system/organization forward on a consistent and sustainable This is the permeable boundary where the scientific method
basis. All this leads to the emergence of mutual trust between operates; some movements to un-ordered domains are often
the leader and the team. Mutual trust is at the center of all involved in most scientific works (hunches, networks, shared
attributes linking them together and guide the leadership model. beliefs…).
Incremental improvement (Item 3) is movement from
complicated to simple domain and back, repeatedly. This is the
IX. CYNEFIN DYNAMICS
engine of technological growth but it can become pathological
if the cyclic movements become a means to try to indefinitely
From the leader perspective, the moving paths between perfect a theory.
Cynefin domains are as important as the domain characteristics C. Movement at the knowable-complex boundary
themselves; moving across boundaries requires a shift to a
The boundary between complicated and complex domain
different model of understanding and interpretation as well as a
complements the simple-complicated border as an engine of new
different leadership style. A deep knowledge of the functional
ideas and front running science. It is not as permeable as the
characteristics of the different movements in the framework
simple-complicated boundary because transitions must translate
increases the leader effectiveness of the decision-making
between order-unorder and from one set of rules to another.
response to rapid change.
Exploration (Item 4) is movement from complicated to
complex domain very useful to the growing of new ideas and
opportunities by reducing or removing central control without a
total disruption of connections. An enterprise could, for
example, allow network communication to identify new
possibilities of improvement in the organizational field. This
action obviously reduces the hierarchical control and, so requires
not only good planning and awareness of the “shadow” side of
the organization, but also careful (but unobtrusive) monitoring
of the situation.
Just-in-time (JIT) transfer, exploitation (Item 5) is
movement from complex to complicated domain that involves
Fig.16. Cynefin dynamics
the selective choice of useful stable patterns in complex space.
The selected patterns and related knowledge are stabilized into
the ordered space when it is needed (just-in-time).
9
D. Movement at the complex-chaotic boundary can choose the most viable ones moving toward complicated
This boundary, like the simple-complicated one, is fluid and domain.
difficult to delineate. In nature, systems move back and forth Immunization (Item 10) is the temporary movement from
across this boundary often to achieve their own organic order. simple to chaotic domain not enough to destabilize the whole
Swarming (Item 6) is movement from chaotic to complicated system. It serves mainly two purposes. First, it shows the
throughout the complex domain. Imposition of order is most devastating force of chaos preparing leaders to face those forces.
appropriate in symmetric conditions, but under asymmetric Second, immunization brings new perspectives, which cause
conditions, or when whole-system interventions are required, a radical disruptions in stable patterns of thought and lead to
leader needs to move from chaos to complex domain. The changes and new complex patterns. This movement enable
transition from chaotic to complex is carried out by creating lateral thinking, prevent entrainment of attitudes destroying the
multiple attractors, or swarming points, as seeds of future glue of stagnant views.
patterns, whereas a transition from chaotic to simple domain
requires a single strong attractor. In the complex domain leader
has the possibilities to see the growing of such patterns forming REFERENCES
around the attractors; those he finds desirable he stabilizes in the • Systems Thinking and the Cynefin Framework - A Strategic
complicated domain; the undesirable ones are destroyed. Approach to Managing Complex Systems by H. William Dettmer
Divergence-convergence (Item 7) is the cyclic movement • Building a Technical Leadership Model, Patrick Godfrey
from complex to chaotic. This allow the generation of a rich • Classificare i sistemi con Cynefin framework, by Giovanni Puliti
variety of patterns to facilitate sense-making.
• The new dynamics of strategy: Sense-making in a complex and
E. Movement through chaos complicated world, by C. F. Kurtz, D. J. Snowden
This movement is usually applied when it is necessary to • A Leader’s Framework for Decision Making, by David J. Snowden
break rigid structures to make transitions much more and Mary E. Boone
manageable and when a strong disruption is the only way to • INCOSE System Engineering Handbook
break up a strong but unhealthy stability. Sometimes the chaotic
• ISO24748 Systems and Software Engineering — Life Cycle
space is also a means for a temporary disruption of all Management
connections (possibly within a restricted context) to stimulate
new growth. • The Incremental Commitment Spiral Model (ICSM) - Barry Boehm,
Jo Ann Lane, Supannika Koolmanojwong, Richard Turner
• Using the Cynefin Framework to make sense of it all – Steve Holt
• Building a Technical Leadership Model – Patrick Godfrey FREng
FINCOSE
• Cognitive Kanban: Improving Decision in a Complex Word –
Michael Sivertsen
• The Cynefin framework: putting complexity into perspective – Helen
Hasan
• Initiating Action: Applying the OODA Loop to Accelerate Your
Decision Making – Nick Horney, Ph.D. Principal, Agility Consulting
• The practice of adaptive leadership – Ronald Heifetz, Alexander
Grashow, Marty Linsky
Fig.17. Cynefin dynamics through chaos
• Adaptive Leadership – The Boston Consulting Group
Entrainment breaking (Item 8) is the periodic movement
from complicated to chaotic to complex domain. This is
sometimes referred to as “creating a burning platform”. This is
a common approach to disrupt the entrained thinking of experts
by creating a more fertile space of interactions from which
leaders can select stabilization points for the movement to the
complicated domain. This method is used to create and validate
new sources and structures for decision-making.
Liberation (Item 9) is the periodic movement from simple to
complex to complicated domain. Enterprises operating in simple
domain often need to change the status quo in order to facilitate
the creation of new emerging ideas and opportunities. They, so,
have to move in the complex domain by, for example, recruiting
external specialist staff or redistributing new responsibilities in
the organization. Then, analytically and methodically, leaders
10