Complexity, Leadership, and the Cynefin Framework

The Cynefin Framework is a description of the nature of different situations. And each situation merits a different kind of leadership.
🧭 This video is part of course module number 3.11.3
🏢 Program 3: Managing and Leading Individuals
🏘️ Course 11: Leadership
🏠 Section 3: Situational Leadership
🏁 GET STARTED
🧰 Free CPD Tools - gum.co/MC-CPD
🧳 Management Courses Onboarding Kit - gum.co/MC-ObK ($3)
⇨ Other videos in our Introduction to Leadership
🎬 The Fiedler Contingency Theory of Leadership Effectiveness • The Fiedler Contingenc...
🎬 Tannenbaum & Schmidt: The Leadership Continuum • Tannenbaum & Schmidt: ...
🎬 A Generic Situational Leadership Model • Situational Leadership...
🎬 Commercial Situational Leadership Models • Commercial Situational...
🎬 Robert House and Path Goal Theory • Robert House and Path ...
📝 LESSON NOTES
The Cynefin Framework was developed by Dave Snowden and a great introduction is his 2007 Harvard Business Review article, ‘A Leader’s Framework for Decision Making’, co-written by David J Snowden and Mary E Boone.
hbr.org/2007/11/a-leaders-fra...
The Cynefin Framework divides the situations we encounter into different domains.
1. The Simple Domain
2. Complicated Domain
3. Complex Domain
4. Chaotic Domain
5. Disordered Domain
🎯 Watching this video is worth 2 Management Courses CPD Points*.
🔎 Details below
🗒️ RECOMMENDED EXERCISES
1. Consider the last two significant problems that you and your team had to deal with. Think about the different aspects of each problem. What domain did each belongs to? (4 MC CPD Points)
2. Did you treat each according to your best understanding of its nature? What can you learn from reflecting on your experience? (4 MC CPD Points)
📚 RECOMMENDED READING
There are a vast number of Leadership books - perhaps more than on any other management-related topic. And there is also a huge range represented in different lists of the best. This no-doubt reflects the different contexts for leadership.
So, any recommended reading list of leadership books must be particularly subjective. I have chosen those that made me think, and which are of particular value to managerial leaders: not sportspeople, military leaders, or CEOs. In no particular order:
📖 Leaders Eat Last
geni.us/ZIawP8Y
📖 Start with Why
geni.us/D8ZSs
📖 Humble Leadership
geni.us/KMuCl
📖 The Leadership Challenge
geni.us/nyQ3
📖 The New Leaders
geni.us/5ziIw
📖 Shackleton's Way
geni.us/Oicsj
📖 Why should Anyone be Led by You
geni.us/xugbBk1
📖 The Habit of Excellence
geni.us/VIz8Z
💰 Links to our book recommendations are affiliated through Amazon and help support our free videos
🗃️ Managers Need a Basic set of kit to do your job well. Here are my top recommendations: kit.co/MikeClayton/manager-s-... (the links are affiliated)
🧑🏽‍💻👩🏼‍💻 Management Courses Continuing Professional Development (CPD) Points
You can record your Management Courses CPD points on our free, downloadable CPD record log.
📓 Download it at: gum.co/MC-CPD
Each video has two levels of MC CPD points. For this video:
⭐️ If you just watched the video, record 2 MC CPD points
🌟 If you also did all the recommended exercises, score a total of 10 MC CPD points
🔖 CHAPTER MARKERS
00:00 - Complexity, Leadership, and the Cynefin Framework
00:19 - The Cynefin Framework
01:02 - The Simple Domain
01:47 - The Complicated Domain
02:49 - The Complex Domain
04:25 - The Chaotic Domain
05:30 - The Disordered Domain
#Cynefin #ManagementCourses #Leadership

[@ManagementCourses]

In this video, I look at how we can use David Snowden and Mary Boone's Cynefin framework to inform our choices of leadership styles. In case you are wondering, we pronounce Cynefin: 'k-nev-in'. See the reply to this comment, for an update.
Thank you for watching. Please support the channel and our free content. Like, subscribe, and hit the notification bell so CZcams knows to let you know when I produce more videos.
And, for maximum support, use the $ Thanks button, under the video, to make a small donation with a highlighted comment.

[@ManagementCourses]

Commenter, @jimallen8186 alerted me to updates to the model that introduce liminality and split what was the disordered (central) state into two: aporetic and confused states.
- Liminal refers to an extended boundary (or threshold) between the complicated and complex, and complex and chaotic states. It recognizes that the transitions out of the complex domain are fuzzy.
- Aporetic refers to the center of the diagram (formerly disordered) when the disorder is inherent and cannot be resolved. This contrasts with Confused', which is used when the uncertainty can be resolved, but needs further evidence, analysis, and understanding.

[@jimallen8186]

@@ManagementCourses I wouldn’t say aporetic cannot be resolved. Rather, aporetic is awareness that you are confused meaning you know you don’t know what condition you are actually in. Time permitting, sit back and observe. Allow it to resolve. If time constrained, treat it as complex. Don’t seek goals or objectives, rather amplify positives dampen negatives while trying to move to a better condition though be on the lookout to see if it be ordered and could be handled as such. Be Gaddis’ fox as opposed to hedgehog (On Grand Strategy). Confused includes awareness of being confused by being aporetic and ignorance of it. In ignorance, we encounter a hazard as we will believe we are in one condition not the others. We could be lucky and be correct though chances are we are not. If we handle complex or chaotic as if it be ordered, we will fail. This describes most American foreign policy since after the long telegram, Marshall Plan, forming of NATO, and the airlift. Consider Vietnam. Think about Afghanistan and Iraq. See our decades of errors in The Twilight War regarding Iran. Look at Lewis’ The Premonition. Compare it with Fulbright’s Arrogance of Power, Tuchman’s March of Folly, Dixon’s Psychology of Military Incompetence, Smith’s The Utility of Force contrasting war amongst the people from industrial war. You can see it all in play in fiction with The Expanse series, in the book not movie WWZ, in End of October.

[@jimallen8186]

Further, if truly in complexity, you won’t resolve either. You can work with it and in a fashion get along, but you’ll never get resolution as you do in the ordered clear and complicated. Chaos is naturally unstable so it will resolve into something else though whether this be favorable or not is open and whether or not this new thing can be resolved or not is also to be seen. That which you transition from complex to complicated wasn’t actually complex, rather its unknown unknowns become knowns and known unknowns. If you want an interesting read, search Medium for Sometimes the Contrarian Aviator Turns Right. This one goes the other way with overly constrained creating issues and shows unintended consequence (which is inherent in anything we do in complexity).
For a different thought to ponder, consider the nature of rules while contrasting prohibitive/restrictive from approval/authorizing realizing the former enables delegation, ingenuity, initiative and the latter stifles such creating ‘mother may i.’ And this brings us to mission command and John Boyd.

[@marrowfreeze]

Cynefin!!!!!!!

[@ManagementCourses]

Yes!!!!!!

[@jimallen8186]

a little out of date; aporetic & liminal are missing. “Disordered” also got renamed “confused” as it really isn’t a domain rather uncertainty as to which you’re in.

[@ManagementCourses]

Thank you for your update. I like 'confused', though I'd prefer 'uncertain'. I will investigate 'aporetic' and 'liminal' states.

[@ManagementCourses]

As I understand it:
Liminal refers to an extended boundary (or threshold) between the complicated and complex, and complex and chaotic states. It recognizes that the transitions out of the complex domain are fuzzy.
Aporetic refers to the center of the diagram (formerly disordered) when the disorder is inherent and cannot be resolved. This contrasts with the label 'confused' that @jimallen8186 refers to, which is used when the uncertainty can be resolved, but needs further evidence, analysis, and understanding.

[@jimallen8186]

@@ManagementCourses I’d say aporetic is when you’re in the center but you know you’re in the center. Confused is if you’re in the center yet also includes when you don’t realize it which becomes a hazard as you may jump into handling it in the wrong way by presuming you are elsewhere. There’s a catch, Dave Snowden does say if you’re in the confused yet have no time to observe, treat it as complex. I’d be careful with the thoughts towards resolution. Only ordered systems, complicated and clear, can be resolved. Chaotic is inherently unstable so will move to something else but I wouldn’t call this resolution. You might resolve the something else, however. In the complex, I don’t think you resolve things. You merely move ‘forward.’ If you can manage to transition to complicated, you can resolve, but not everything can transition. Because of this, I would not view confused as the area of irresolution. If you incorporate Scott Page’s complexity lectures into this with his ‘dancing landscape’ combined with needing to balance exploration against exploitation, you might say even while capitalizing you haven’t really resolved. Consider also Snowden’s Sense-Making and his new Estuaries framework.

[@jimallen8186]

@@ManagementCourses uncertain would work if aporetic as you know you don’t know. If not aporetic yet in the center, you may feel certain but have it wrong. Hence, you are confused. Confused, however, is a state to which you can know you are - aporetic - or not realize you are, center outside aporetic.