Reflections on the Cynefin Framework
Studying the Cynefin framework has helped me to visualize and
better understand processes I have been studying and practicing for over 30
years now. Back then, the Air Force had embraced
‘Situational Leadership’ and pushed it at every opportunity. It made sense at a conceptual level…people
are different so a good leader should adjust his leadership style
accordingly. The concept if adjusted a
little has a variety of applications.
Things are different so treat them differently. Not all problems are equal nor is the process
by which they are solved. As a radar
technician, I learned about simple, complicated, and complex systems and the
different approaches to troubleshooting those systems. I responded to changing contexts and I was
able to make decisions in those contexts.
I suppose I was driven by intuition or necessity and I probably stumbled
more often than I soared. I did not
think about it; I did what I thought was expected and it worked most of the
time. Now the Cynefin framework tells me
that decision making is not a ‘one size fits all’ process (Snowden, 2010). It follows.
It makes sense to me. I believe
it.
These experiences are probably the reason I was immediately
impressed by the Cynefin framework. The
Cynefin framework is a valuable and powerful tool that will improve the
accuracy, timeliness, and breadth of my decisions. The framework gives me the information I need
to assess the context of the issue. It
contains specific characteristics to confirm the context assessment as well as
further define the issue, and it provides a decision model for each context to
apply to the issue to come to the right decision. It is a sense-making model (Snowden, 2010). It uses your ambiguous data and helps you determine
the prevailing operative context so you can make context appropriate choices
(Snowden & Boone, 2007). This helps
you avoid the mistake of applying the wrong action to the prevailing context
which will fail, or worse (Vasilescu. 2011).
Getting it right the first time definitely benefits my decision-making.
“Effective leaders learn to shift their decision-making styles
to match changing business environments….By correctly identifying the governing
context, staying aware of danger signals, and avoiding inappropriate reactions,
mangers can lead effectively in a variety of situations” (Snowden & Boone,
2007, p. 12). I recall working a complex
failure of the radar system. I was the
senior technician working with three other technicians. The problem we were sent to work was causing
the transmitter to shut down, but the fault code was generic and did not point
to a cause. I suspected we were
troubleshooting a symptom and the actual fault was in a different system which
caused the transmitter to shut down. I
believed there was only one failure, but it could be caused by any number of
systems tied to the transmitter. I had
just explained my theory to the other technicians and we decided to change
course and look at a group of circuits that provided input to the transmitter when
a different fault occurred. I
immediately knew what the problem was.
Two of the other technicians recognized the failure as well but the
third was a relatively new trainee. It
was a simple problem. The fault produced
an accurate fault message that identified the problem and explained exactly
what to do. The dielectric gas for the transmitter
was low. I asked one of the technicians
to walk through the process with the trainee and correct the problem. While he was training, I went back to
prioritizing the circuits we would look at from most likely to least
likely. When the trainer and trainee
returned and verified the repair, I asked both of them a few questions to make
sure they covered everything and the trainee was comfortable with the training. The context of the gas problem was simple
and, once trained, the trainee could follow the procedure on his own and
achieve the same result. The other
problem was complex. We got lucky and found
the fault in the second circuit we checked.
After repairing the system we were able to trace the signal and see how
the fault was occurring, however, we were not able to determine why it
generated the erroneous fault code. The
ability to shift contexts is important. If
I had not been able to shift contexts I would have missed a training
opportunity. Snowden states that, “Good
leadership requires openness to change on an individual level. Truly adept leaders will know not only how to
identify the context they’re working in at any given time but also how to
change their behavior and their decisions to match that context” (Snowden &
Boone, 2007, p. 11). For example, shifting
from a complicated context to a chaotic context or vice versa is a dramatic
change. Directive versus collaborative
leadership styles are almost polar opposites.
One would also have to change their vocal tone, posture, and sense of
urgency. This is a drastic change at
best, but imagine how effective a leader would be in either context without
making the complete transformation.
Being able to make decisions in multiple contexts is sometimes
necessary at home too. Last summer I was
making arrangements to rent a facility for my family to have Thanksgiving
dinner together. The context is simple:
call, verify availability, and pay the deposit.
The lady had me on hold while she went to find her calendar. I noticed my brother outside and went out to
meet him. He pointed to a large pine
tree that had broken at the trunk in a storm the night before. It was partially down and hung up in a tree
branch. It had taken the path directly
over my storage building and stopped just a few feet before taking out the main
power lines to the property. I was still
on hold so I asked my brother to call the power company. They dispatched a truck immediately. This issue was complicated. I could clearly see the problem and knew
there were several options to resolve the problem, but I did not know how to
fix it without causing further damage (French, 2013). The lady was back on the line again and
telling me she finally found the calendar in the back seat of her truck but she
did not know how it got there. I live in
a very small town. She and I were still
talking when a tree removal truck stopped in front of the house. I was trying to talk to both at the same
time, but I was not doing it very well. The
tree removal crew agreed to wait. She
and I finished our business with a date booked.
I could bring the deposit anytime and just drop it off at the café. Again, I live in a small town. The crew had already determined that the tree
was threatening lines that are my responsibility, therefore they would not
remove it. However they would send a
crew out to drop the lines so I could remove it. They would also reinstall the lines after the
tree was clear. Nothing I said or
offered changed their mind. They would
not be responsible for destroying my storage building. And they left. My brother and I spent an hour or so looking
it over and agreed on a plan that could work.
So we decided to do it. Booking
the banquet room was a simple context. It
was straightforward and understood even if it did take a long time to get it
done. The tree was a complicated context
even though bringing in the experts did not work out. There were several options to solve the
problem. Collaborative thinking brought
out the option we chose. The plan was
successful; we removed it without damaging my building or the power lines.
I have taken a critical look at the Cynefin framework. I think I understand it. I do not understand what is meant by how can
the Cynefin framework provide an improved context for decision making. The contexts are set in the framework,
constants if you will. They are what
they are. Contexts cannot be improved
without changing them; therefor, they would not be improved they would be different. If the contexts are different the framework would
also be different. I do not intend to be
difficult or dodge the question. The contexts
are the Cynefin Framework: Simple (now called Obvious), Complicated, Complex,
Chaotic, and Disorder. The name of the
context can be changed, and they have been over the years, but the contexts have
always been the same.
~Pete
References:
French,
S. (2013). Cynefin, statistics and decision analysis. The Journal of the
Operational Research Society, 64(4),
547-561. doi: http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu/10.1057/jors.2012.23
Snowden, D.
J., (2010). The Cynefin
Framework. YouTube.
Accessed 2017 February 28. Retrieved from:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7oz366X0-8 (Links to an external site.)
Snowden, D.
J., & Boone, M. E. (2007). A Leader's Framework for Decision Making. (cover
story). Harvard Business Review, 85(11),
68-76.
Vasilescu, C, (2011,
December). Strategic decision making
using sense making models: The Cynefin Framework. Paper presented at the Sixth
International Scientific Conference on Defense Resorces Management in the 21st
Century, Brasov, Romania. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu/docview/1127283106?accountid=27203
No comments:
Post a Comment