I had a fantastic day Sunday last; good lunch, stimulating diverse conversation, rugby in Wales, and all in the company of Dave Snowden.

The conversation covered philosophy, literature, the strength and frailties of human nature, the needs of (all of us in) management to have a degree of certainty in decision outcomes.

Now, in certain contexts, exclusively quantitative measurements are powerful decision aids, but we fall into trouble when we extend the context inappropriately, yet still maintain our absolute belief in the power of quantitative measurement.

Continue reading "Management vs Tonga" »

It is very important to have a clear picture of your starting point, particularly when solving complex problems, but it is activity in which we underinvest, particularly in strategy generation. But while we are waiting for a home-grown Complex-domain diagnostic, there are other tools which can give us actionable insight, and provide a triangulation point so the journey forward can begin.

When I start a strategy project I usually work with the senior team to establish a clear (coherent and cohesive?) picture of the current external and internal business environments. I employ a number of tools including narrative research and, for probing the senior team, the Kirton Adaptor-Innovator (KAI) theory and supporting instrument.

Continue reading "This above all: to thine own self be true" »

In a recent conversation during the diagnosis stage of a strategy project, I was asked whether I would, “put my money where my mouth is,” and price my engagement on a contingency basis. Given the large potential value generation in this project, I might have been tempted but for a lesson learnt earlier in my consulting career.

Continue reading "Where are we?" »

A number of threads on the Cognitive Edge blog highlight the frustration and difficulty in getting companies to use new tools and methods from the world of complex systems. I thought I would offer a narrow financial perspective on why companies are failing to engage with these new ways of thinking. My personal view is that one of the major reasons for the resistance to change in a company is the financial constraints on the company. For the sake of brevity and simplicity I will only consider large UK companies and how simple finance based decision making constrains change management and investment in such techniques as “Probe-Sense-Respond”. All decision making within a company is made within the constrained framework of finance and the following are the top four constraints:

1. The “free market” framework
2. Fiduciary duties of company directors
3. Motivation and decision making of senior management
4. Motivation of middle management

Continue reading "Change management – a financial perspective" »

For those of us who travel extensively, one of the most valued Christmas gifts is the opportunity to take time over the holidays to read heavy books. These may not be mentally demanding nor intellectually ponderous but their physical dimensions preclude them as traveling companions; when packing I err toward the gazelle rather than the mule.

On re-reading some essays by George Orwell I was struck once more by the impact the past has on our future direction, and how little overt cognisance is taken of this point in standard strategy generation processes. Snowden summed up it more succinctly than Orwell (a rare feat and a compliment) and though I can’t find the exact quote, it is close to, “the past informs the future, but does not predict it.” Nevertheless, despite Snowden’s pithiness, Orwell’s insight is still worth reporting in full.

Continue reading "A turnip seed never grows into a parsnip" »

It will be difficult to apply ‘probe-sense-respond’ in business because the environment subconsciously prohibits experimentation. That would be my conclusion based on fifteen years of encouraging clients to practice safe-to-fail problem-solving. We have work ahead of us to apply it successfully.

Continue reading "The Price is Right?" »

An alternative title for this piece could have been “Narrative research—a practical introduction.”

As stated previously, most of my clients are hard-nosed and commercially-orientated, and typically prefer to see a cause-and-effect relationship between spending and a return. They often have a science or engineering background, and have a predilection for anything that can be measured and spreadsheeted—preferably with error bars. They have huge intellectual horsepower and readily assimilate the concepts around complex adaptive systems, but less readily want to deal with the attending implications of managing ambiguity.

This preference for certainty (with error bars) is reflected in their allocation of market research spend. External reports are usually industry reports from large publication houses (also bought by their competitors) and internal research are mostly Likert scale—as is any customer satisfaction survey. Between survey periods, the numbers are poured over incessantly, but I have yet to see any business link a return on the investment for these surveys which ties in directly the resultant actions from these surveys. I think there is an opportunity to shift this experience to the better, but how can it be done?

Continue reading "Dots and patterns: making your competitors colour blind" »

The winner is Mr Steve Dawkins, and a copy of Obliquity is in the post.

Thank you too for all other responses including a number of waggish entries....and yes, Dylan Thomas did write more than "Under Milk Wood."

It seems that this won't be the last post after all.

In the next week or so I will post a short process on how we introduce narrative research into an organisation with a high preference for quantitative research. Finally, I will introduce the concept of problem-solving leadership and how this ties into natural science and complexity.

If any of the previous blogs have been of interest and worthy of further expansion, please let me know via direct email (ijenkins@mkt-edge.com) and I will try to publish further information in the time available

I’m not sure if I always get the whole ‘change management’ thing. I have been in full-time employment for over 30 years, and I have seen basic problem-solving or simply getting stuff done, be cordoned off for execution by a recipe-following, jargon-laden club whose membership have derailed or even prevented business improvement. I have seen real movement, real change and genuine heart-felt challenge ignored, overrun or dismissed—to the detriment of many organisations.

Let me be blunt. I have seen some ‘Change Management’ projects snuff out feedback loops; I have seem them absolve leaders from explaining weak decisions; I have seen Change Managers override warning signs, and even driven creaky transactional processes into chaos. Yesterday I heard a Change Management professional decrying a group of lathe operators who had successfully developed and implemented an improved manufacturing workflow by ‘chatting over tea,’ instead of forming a guiding coalition and then adhering to the remaining 6 or 7 steps—as per the CM manual issued in February.

I kid you not.

Continue reading "Create the demand to participate" »