Challenges are now open, complex, dynamic, and networked

In Frame Innovation, Dorst argues that the nature of problems has shifted from merely simple (or even complicated) to problems that are open, complex, dynamic, and networked, which are defined as follows (OCDN):

An open problem is one where the system border is not clear, or where it is permeable.
A complex problem is one that consists of many elements, with numerous connections between them.
A dynamic problem situation changes over time, with the addition of new elements and the shifting of connections (e.g., through the shifting of priorities).
The networked nature of today’s problem situations means that they potentially influence each other constantly.

Solving these kinds of problems requires fundamentally restructuring organizations accordingly:

The passing of the structures and systems of the industrial age and the rise of a networked society have resulted in open, complex, dynamic, and networked challenges that can only be successfully met by organizations that are ready to become open, complex, and networked themselves.^[1]

He elaborates on the essential dilemma that traditional organizations face in solving these OCDN problems:

These open, complex, dynamic, and networked problems just do not gel well with the assumptions behind our conventional problem-solving methods, because most of our conventional strategies were conceived to work in a reasonably isolated, static, and hierarchically ordered “miniworld.” When problems appeared, we could isolate them in a separate problem arena, decompose the problem into relative simple subproblems and analyze these, create subsolutions, and then build those subsolutions together into an overall solution that satisfied all concerned. If this strategy of divide-and-solve failed, we could use the alternative strategy of exercising authority to “simplify” the problem area by overruling some parties, and force a solution that satisfied the most powerful player.^[2]

In a world where problems are open, complex, dynamic, and networked, deconstructing them into their component pieces is either impossible or ineffective. Furthermore, exercising power to force a solution is no longer viable.

The enclosed miniworlds of our societies, economies, and cultures have been replaced by a tangle of relationships within complex and overlapping networks, where problems cannot be simplified by being split up (the network of relationships is too strong) and power doesn’t rest in one place anymore (so overrule-and-conquer is out of the question). Moreover, problems are so intimately related to each other (and there are so many interdependencies) that they become impossible to isolate…^[3]

Unless organizations recognize the fundamentally different nature of the world today, they will default to their same problem-solving approaches because the problems resemble the ones they have solved in the past.

Often, organizations that do not realize the open, complex, dynamic, and networked nature of the world around them get tricked into using their established routines because the problem, as they define it for themselves, mostly looks the same as earlier problems. And indeed, the core problems themselves may not have changed much over time … but the problem boundaries are harder to draw, and there is a much more complex and dynamic context around the problems we are facing today. That context ultimately defines what practices will work, and which will fail.^[4]

#strategic #complexity #systems