Saturday, January 14, 2017

A632.8.3.RB_MilliganSteven

The Cynefin Framework gives us the ability to react to different problems in different ways.  By understanding the framework we can quickly react to these situations and act accordingly.  If you don't understand the differences between the quadrants in the Cynefin Framework you may find yourself constantly living in only one quadrant.  Doing this can force us into the Chaotic quadrant if we're not careful.  Here we act first before we sense.  This is meant to handle the initial problem at hand.  Much like covering an immediate wound.  This does not work for every situation and should only be saved for truly chaotic instances where immediate action is necessary.

On occasion we can make decisions in multiple contexts.  This is especially the case when one situation changes and becomes another.  Sometimes a complicated situation can become a complex or chaotic situation and we need to adjust as needed. 

When I was at my first duty station we were tasked with improving the deployment process.  The scenario would be that we needed to be ready to deploy a minimum of three hundred people within a seventy-two hour window.  This meant that the units needed to have all their training done and have their people ready in that time.  As the Installation Deployment Officer I was the person heading up the plan for the Wing.  When we received a new Wing Commander he expected us to be able to start deploying the first group of people in only sixteen hours and the rest to follow.  He wanted the final F-16 off the ground by the seventy-two hour mark.  This was a complete change in how we did things and would force every unit on the base to change their method of preparing for deployment.  In this case we went from a complicated task to a complex task.  As the beginning we had used a best practice that had been employed for a while and worked very well for the requirements we had been given.  However, when the shift in timeline took place we needed to quickly gather the experts each unit on the base and put together a plan to be able to accomplish what had been asked of us.  In the article from the Harvard Business Review it states, "Most situations and decisions in organizations are complex because some major change—a bad quarter, a shift in management, a merger or acquisition—introduces unpredictability and flux" (A Leader's Framework for Decision Making, 2007).  In this case the major change was the Wing Commander taking on a new focus on the deployment process. 

Once we came together as a working group we developed several plans that would help to speed up the process.  We also had to trim down excess things we had been doing in order to speed up the people processing lines and the cargo processing timelines.  By doing this we would be accepting a greater amount of risk, but we would also be able to make the seventy-two hour window required by the Wing Commander.  The article also states that, "Another potential obstacle is “analysis paralysis,” where a group of experts hits a stalemate, unable to agree on any answers because of each individual’s entrained thinking—or ego" (A Leader's Framework for Decision Making, 2007).  During the first part of the working group we experienced this a great deal regarding the personnel deployment processing line.  We need to be able to process everyone according to what the regulations required but we needed to do it faster than we were able.  Part way through the week a person that had been on vacation returned.  When she arrived she joined the group with insights and expertise we had not previously thought of and we were able to cut down the time it took to process everyone significantly. 

This same type of issue can arise from simple domains that turn quickly into chaotic domains.  One such case happened to me while I was deployed.  I was asked to take over a weekly meeting regarding the future sustainment of the United Stated military in Iraq.  This was a weekly meeting that would be led by a two star general where he would be connecting with nine different bases around the middle east and would also have a room full of people.  In this meeting there was usually no less than seven generals officers.  I was unfamiliar with most of the communication devices we used and pretty much how everything worked and was extremely nervous about making sure everything went perfectly.  Luckily I had a friend that was very experienced and would be around for several weeks to help me get up to speed as much as he could before he returned home.  In my mind this was a simple task that required a right way of doing things.  Regarding this the article states, "Simple contexts, properly assessed, require straightforward management and monitoring. Here, leaders sense, categorize, and respond. That is, they assess the facts of the situation, categorize them, and then base their response on established practice" (A Leader's Framework for Decision Making, 2007).  When I was being trained I understood there was a right way of handling the meeting.  As long as I followed the steps everything should work out well.  Over the course of several weeks, with help from my friend, the meeting went well and all the communication devices hooked up with no problems.

The first week that I was expected to run the meeting by myself we happened to lose all communications about five minutes before the meeting was to start.  In the military world no one wants to hear that something can't be done.  They only want to heart what your second and third courses of action are.  In this case I didn't have any.  I immediately went into chaos mode.  My only goal was to act and establish order in some way.  I needed to figure out a way to connect everyone so that the meeting was able to continue although we didn't have any way to communicate via the internet.  I quickly found the commanders communications team and tasked them with finding the phone numbers of all the people that would have been connected through video teleconference and to find out if there was a place that each person could go where they could connect with classified telephone lines.  I then asked the team to connect all the members in the outlying stations as quickly as possible.  Normally we would also show the PowerPoint slides on the television screens but part of the problem with the network going down was that the connected network went down also.  Due to this we weren't able to broadcast the slides.  Luckily I still had a copy on my hard drive and tasked four people to print five copies each.  This would cover everyone in the room so they would each have a copy.  All in all, this took us fifteen minutes to accomplish and only put us ten minutes behind schedule rather than having to cancel the meeting all together.  Thankfully, because of this I established new courses of action based on this situation that would us to mitigate these problems in the future if something similar were to happen again. 

As leaders we often have certain personality traits or training that cause us to want to stay within certain domains.  We may be straightforward thinkers that always want to live in the simple domain.  We may thrive in chaos and like to simply act before we sense or respond.  We may want to gather experts and let them do all the work for us.  The Cynefin Framework provides us with tools that enable us to be able to work in different domains depending on the problem at hand.  It enables us to decide which framework we need to work from.  By understanding which framework to work from it can help us to quickly form the teams needed to solve the problem at hand.  Doing this saves time, money and stress.  It can also help us get to the right solution or solutions faster and more efficiently. 

Our understanding of these frameworks can also breed creativity.  By using games and scenarios to address different problems and situations we can practice what it may be like to actually experience these situations and therefore learn to work within these different frameworks and understand which ones are best to use in different situations.  Finally, the article states this regarding the world we live in, "A deep understanding of context, the ability to embrace complexity and paradox, and a willingness to flexibly change leadership style will be required for leaders who want to make things happen in a time of increasing uncertainty" (A Leader's Framework for Decision Making, 2007).  In a fast paced and constantly changing world we need to be proficient in different leadership styles and ways of addressing different problems that arise.  By understanding and using the Cynefin Framework and knowing what context to work from we can be better leaders that can truly affect change. 

References

A Leader's Framework for Decision Making. (2007). Harvard Business Review, Snowden, David J.; Boone, Mary E.

No comments:

Post a Comment