![]() 
  | 
  ||||
| Go
    for multiple actions at the fringes, let direction arise. You dont have to be
    "sure" before you proceed with anything.  | 
  ||||
 
 
  | 
    As
    we have already noted, in a CAS it does little good to plan the details. You can never
    know exactly what will happen until you do it. So, allowing the flexibility of multiple
    approaches is a very reasonable thing to do. Of course, such a flexible approach is
    unreasonable when we view the situation through the metaphor of a machine or military
    organization. A machine can work only one way, and an old-style military organization must
    follow procedures and regulations. The science that supports this
    principle of CAS behavior comes primarily from the study of gene pools in evolutionary
    biology. David Ackley points outs that, Researchers have shown clearly and
    unequivocally how populations of organisms that are learning (that is, exploring their
    fitness possibilities by changing behavior) evolve faster than populations that are not
    learning. We do not think it strains the metaphor here to suggest that our
    managerial instincts to drive for organizational consensus around a single option might be
    equivalent to inbreeding in a gene pool. And we all know the kinds of dysfunction that
    inbreeding in nature can spawn. We are personally struck by the fact that even though the
    words organization and organism have a common root, we have
    learned to think about them in such remarkably different ways. The fringes that we are
    referring to here are the issues that are far from the zone of certainty and agreement.
    Recall that we pointed out that it was not a question of the machine metaphor being wrong
    and the CAS metaphor being right, nor is it about throwing out clockware and replacing it
    with swarmware. Neither approach is inherently right or wrong; but either approach can be
    inappropriate and ineffective in a given context. The leadership skill lies in the
    intuition to know which approach is needed in the context one is in. The degree of
    certainty and agreement is a good guide. 
 However, when we do find
    ourselves in situations far from certainty and agreement, the management advice contained
    in this principle is to quit agonizing over it, quit trying to analyze it to certainty.
    Try several small experiments, reflect carefully on what happens and gradually shift time
    and attention toward those things that seem to be working the best (that is, let direction
    arise). These multiple actions at the fringes also serve the purpose of providing us with
    additional insights about the larger systems within which every system is inevitably
    buried. A concrete example of this
    principle is the health care organization that is trying to come up with a new financial
    incentive plan for physicians. There are many options, with success and failure stories
    for each one. Therefore, we are far from certainty and agreement. Rather than meeting
    endlessly over it trying to pick the right approach, experiment with several approaches.
    See what happens, see what seems to work and in what context. Over time, you may find a
    right way for you, or you may find several right ways. 
 
  | 
  |||
Next | Previous | Return to Contents List All Components of Edgeware
    Principles Copyright © 2001, Curt  |