Forums Managing Risk in Complexity SIG
(MRC SIG)
Working Group B: What principles are important in dealing with complexity?

Viewing 15 posts - 76 through 90 (of 472 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • Robert McMartin
    SIG Chair
      @rmcmartin
      Post count: 41
      Up
      0
      ::

      I read the UK report with great interest and I was struck by two things.  While there was mention of Programme Management and Programme Managers there was no mention of project management or the competency of the people running the project/programmes.

      As I was reading the report, I couldn’t help hearing Ian’s words on complex project governance almost on each paragraph.

      The amazing levels of parallels between the UK MOD Procurement Group and the Australian CASG were unbelievable, I could have played Snap with the report, when comparing it to Australia.

      Tony Graham
      Participant
        @tony-graham
        Post count: 15
        Up
        0
        ::

        David

        Regret I’ve been busy travelling with work. I can’t make the 27th July either as touring Scotland.

        Please let me know the next meeting date when available.

        I’m keeping up with the notes.

        Many thanks

        Tony Graham

        BluewaterPortfolio@gmail.com

         

        Ian Mack
        Participant
          @ian-mack
          Post count: 118
          Up
          0
          ::

          Hi Davin and thanks. I will try to get to this before week’s end (if lucky). Busy on a number of things, including the latest UK report on their ‘broken’ procurement system at the link below. Ian.

          https://publications.<wbr />parliament.uk/pa/cm5803/<wbr />cmselect/cmdfence/1099/<wbr />summary.html

          Davin Shellshear
          SIG Chair
            @davin-shellshear
            Post count: 161
            Up
            0
            ::

            Hi Group B

            Attached is the transcript of our last Group B meeting on 6 July 23. Lot of interesting thoughts emerged in that meeting.

            Sorry for the delay in transcribing, I have been fully occupied in other work until now.

            ICCPM have asked if Group B would be willing to to host a webinar in November on the work we are doing. I of course agreed and am now looking for a bunny to do it.

            I thought the last meetings thoughts around honesty in business cases (owning up to disbenefits, minimising harm on complex projects, etc.) might be a really interesting topic, and we could fold in some of our earlier reports into the topic. What do you think.

            See you next meeting on 27th July.

            Cheers

            Attachments:
            You must be logged in to view attached files.
            Robert McMartin
            SIG Chair
              @rmcmartin
              Post count: 41
              Up
              0
              ::

              Morning all,

              In reviewing the wikipedia entry about Incrementalism (thanks Andrew), I came across the term Critical Junction Theory, which I thought was relevant to Complexity.

              Critical juncture theory – Wikipedia

              <b>”Critical juncture theory</b> focuses on critical junctures, i.e., large, rapid, discontinuous changes,<sup id=”cite_ref-1″ class=”reference”>[1]</sup> and the long-term causal effect or historical legacy of these changes.<sup id=”cite_ref-2″ class=”reference”>[2]</sup> Critical junctures are turning points that alter the course of evolution of some entity (e.g., a species, a society). Critical juncture theory seeks to explain both (1) the historical origin and maintenance of social order, and (2) the occurrence of social change through sudden, big leaps.<sup id=”cite_ref-3″ class=”reference”>[3]”</sup>

              My thoughts were drawn to the concept that some of the Transitions we have identified could technically be Critical Junctions.   Determining these Critical Junctions could be one more tool in the recognition of Transitions within Complex projects.

              Robert McMartin
              SIG Chair
                @rmcmartin
                Post count: 41
                Up
                0
                ::

                Take 2 (sorry told me the file was too big)

                Davin Shellshear
                SIG Chair
                  @davin-shellshear
                  Post count: 161
                  Up
                  0
                  ::

                  Hi Ian

                  Log in details below. It is the same for every meeting.

                  ICCPM ADMIN is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.

                   

                  Join Zoom Meeting

                  https://us06web.zoom.us/j/89707644924?pwd=cTB6TVd6bXFydjVXajlLOWJyckJ3dz09

                   

                  Meeting ID: 897 0764 4924

                  Passcode: 690949

                  One tap mobile

                  +61370182005,,89707644924#,,,,*690949# Australia

                  +61731853730,,89707644924#,,,,*690949# Australia

                   

                  Dial by your location

                  +61 3 7018 2005 Australia

                  +61 7 3185 3730 Australia

                  +61 8 6119 3900 Australia

                  +61 8 7150 1149 Australia

                  +61 2 8015 6011 Australia

                  +1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)

                  +1 360 209 5623 US

                  +1 386 347 5053 US

                  +1 507 473 4847 US

                  +1 564 217 2000 US

                  +1 646 931 3860 US

                  +1 669 444 9171 US

                  +1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)

                  +1 689 278 1000 US

                  +1 719 359 4580 US

                  +1 929 436 2866 US (New York)

                  +1 253 205 0468 US

                  +1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)

                  +1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)

                  +1 305 224 1968 US

                  +1 309 205 3325 US

                  +1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)

                  +1 778 907 2071 Canada

                  +1 780 666 0144 Canada

                  +1 204 272 7920 Canada

                  +1 438 809 7799 Canada

                  +1 587 328 1099 Canada

                  +1 647 374 4685 Canada

                  +1 647 558 0588 Canada

                  +44 208 080 6592 United Kingdom

                  +44 330 088 5830 United Kingdom

                  +44 131 460 1196 United Kingdom

                  +44 203 481 5237 United Kingdom

                  +44 203 481 5240 United Kingdom

                  +44 203 901 7895 United Kingdom

                  +44 208 080 6591 United Kingdom

                  Meeting ID: 897 0764 4924

                  Passcode: 690949

                  Find your local number: https://us06web.zoom.us/u/kreBaJkn6

                   

                  Ian Mack
                  Participant
                    @ian-mack
                    Post count: 118
                    Up
                    0
                    ::

                    Hi Rob – Great pictogram, I am sure a few relationships are missing, like good ones :) And I am not sure where the document is you marked up in green, but no worries.

                    For Davin – Have I missed a ZOOM invite to this week’s WG meeting? I am starting to think I have fallen off the list – or been taken off, which would send a message that would also be fine with me.   The old guy

                    Robert McMartin
                    SIG Chair
                      @rmcmartin
                      Post count: 41
                      Up
                      0
                      ::

                      Hi Group,

                      I have read the document and included a few thoughts (all my changes in green).

                      There is also another illustration included, that frankly is probably one of the most realistic organisation charts it really this should be mandatory

                      Attachments:
                      You must be logged in to view attached files.
                      Ian Mack
                      Participant
                        @ian-mack
                        Post count: 118
                        Up
                        0
                        ::

                        Hi Team – I would like to slightly modify the question to be asked for our next Working Group objective: “What elements should be considered in defining success at the launch of a complex project?”

                        Based on some literature after some Internet surfing and our last discussion, it strikes me that this subject could include the following criteria with KPIs:

                        – What are often called ‘the two elements to project efficiency’, those being cost/budget and time/schedule

                        – Product quality

                        – User requirements/satisfaction

                        – Other stakeholder expectations

                        – Governance effectiveness

                        – Project execution team well-being (e.g. learning, morale, coping with uncertainty)

                        – Process effectiveness

                        – Organisational benefits

                        >Immediate benefits [e.g. Return on Investment, share growth]

                        >Future strategic benefits [e.g. reputation, betterment of citizenry/humanity,  technologically improved products]

                        > Future tactical benefits [e.g. minimum in-service support costs, project development and/or

                        execution improvements]

                        Concurrently, one could also consider:

                        – Assumptions supporting these criteria

                        – The time frame when these criteria could/should be measured

                        – Whether each objective must be ‘satisfied completely’ or just ‘satisficed’

                        – Recording the degree of harm avoided during the project’s journey

                        I also found an interesting graph in one paper (simple, complicated and complex as per the Cynefin Framework – see attachment).

                        For consideration as we approach next week’s meeting – Ian

                        Attachments:
                        You must be logged in to view attached files.
                        Davin Shellshear
                        SIG Chair
                          @davin-shellshear
                          Post count: 161
                          Up
                          0
                          ::

                          Hi Group B

                          Attached is the transcript from our last meeting on 25 May. Sorry I am a bit late – it took a few days to get the recording.

                          At this point a suggested new topic is: What are the important elements that should be addressed in defining success when are launching a complex project?

                          Please consider this and suggest changes or alternatives as you wish. I am hoping we can finalise our topic using the forum – to use at the beginning of our next meeting on 15th June 8:00am AEST.

                          Cheers

                          Davin

                           

                          Attachments:
                          You must be logged in to view attached files.
                          Andrew Pyke
                          Participant
                            @mr-andrew-pyke
                            Post count: 41
                            Up
                            0
                            ::

                            Team,

                            I have mentioned a few times, my hypothesis that the reason that rates of project failure remain constant – despite all the improvements – may be because the better the capability gets, the more demand is placed on it.  There is, afterall, no shortage of demanding complex projects that need to be done in the world.

                            On this point, I discovered the Jevon’s Paradox (Jevons_paradox) , which sort of says the more efficient something becomes, the more it gets consumed, until it is rendered inefficient again.  e.g freeway or broadband capacity.

                            Davin Shellshear
                            SIG Chair
                              @davin-shellshear
                              Post count: 161
                              Up
                              0
                              ::

                              Hi Ian and Group B

                              I am not intending to ‘take you on’ (I think), but rather broaden the conversation into areas that are of my particular interest – probably rather selfish – but I hope is of benefit to all. In the following I am highly influenced in the following by a discussion by Sam Talucci which resonates with me and my experience.

                              I am trying to focus on the need to reflect on our experiences (which I think Group B has been very good at) and how we hold our selves accountable, including to the group, and hold the group accountable, just as they hold us accountable.

                              This paying attention to how we enable and constrain each other – as we participate with others, receive input, creative input, think, reflect, and detach/ abstract – is a non-linear, circular process of creating meaning, in regard to what we think we are doing together, and renegotiating our individual and group identity. Work behaviour is an outgoing emergent social phenomenon that we strive to pay attention to, reflect on, and engage in our daily activities. Our work behaviour is certainly coloured by our world views and our behavioural pre-dispositions, so it is a nature – nurture outcome.

                              The risk is that people apply their models or theories based on the assumption is that there is a right way and a wrong way to act. It would be preferable if people develop the ability to apply models, and in regard to risk, reflect from real experience on how well they informed individual and group judgement, and decision-making.May I comment that I think this has been the strength of Group B.

                              Developing practical judgement is not the mere application of the theory or model but develops as we engage with each other in day-to-day activities and gain experience about the specific and general patterns, it emerges in the ongoing interactions of sense making and making sense.

                              Doubt allows us to question our thinking in the domain of leadership. What if much of what is currently accepted about leading, and our interpretations of that does not lead to satisfying outcomes for an organisation or a project.

                              This rather raises a question about how we make sense of the complexity inherent in our daily activities. The challenge is our willingness to raise doubt in regard to the current thinking in our organisation. At the very minimum we should examine what is constraining us and reflect on what might or might not be occurring in the organisation, for which doubt is an invaluable starting point.

                              In my view leadership is real, but it not the act of an individual, but a social process in which the ‘leader’ makes statements, gives directions, proposes a particular future, etc. Until the recipients of those messages, perhaps followers or stakeholders, hear that, interpret that, discuss that in their local groups, react to that and respond to that, and then the ‘leader’ respond to the followers response, etc. there has been no leadership. Ian’s talk about ground truthing is a great example of that, getting out there and not sitting in an office making up stories about ‘them’.

                              I think that much of what we see as complexity emerges from that social interaction, and the incredible variety of people and the almost unending unknowableness (is that a word?) of people. I think we can glimpse that world, see trends, name things, reflect on our own experience whilst also being part of the group, etc and find useful places to draw from our collective experiences to the benefit of others.

                              Whilst I am in the business of declaring some of the those who have influenced me, I might mention Ralph Stacey and more recently ‘Complexity and Leadership’ by Chris Mowles. For what it is worth!

                              Cheers

                              Davin

                              Ian Mack
                              Participant
                                @ian-mack
                                Post count: 118
                                Up
                                0
                                ::

                                Thanks Davin. Though, I cannot help but think that, by your note and the article referenced, you have in some ways “taken me on” with my traditional ‘model’ for addressing risks from early planning through delivery, amidst complexity. As Hannah Arendt suggested in the daunting article you sent (I certainly was less ‘amused’ than challenged by much of it), we need to be able to “realise the uniqueness of the particular circumstances we find ourselves facing so as to not assume that they are covered by our existing ways of knowing”. Ouch!

                                Looking at your note, might I paraphrase the question you have offered as follow: “why are people not all comfortable with the uncertainty that accompanies complexity, and can we develop those that are not comfortable with uncertainty to be better able to navigate the dimensions of complex projects?” I could be cheeky and say that it too might fail the paradox test, in that the levels of complexity and of comfort will vary dramatically based on context uniqueness, along with the concern that any ‘development’ stream could become a form of brainwashing and thus flawed from its onset – as perhaps one could also see our complexity techniques paper as well.

                                In reading through your note and the article, I was immediately struck by four well-trodden threads as an initial response:

                                – “We are what we ate, when and where”, and especially based on our parents/mentors before we became young adults – our cognitive biases and worldview that get in the way therefore being shaped by our journey through life.

                                – Following on from the last thread, embraced diversity within the project execution team can be beneficial by offering many different perspectives that can challenge the general view of evidence, values and approaches.

                                – Critical thinking is essential amidst complexity, it defined variously as including “the objective analysis and evaluation of some degree of evidence based on disciplined thinking that is clear and open-minded” – ‘objective’ being the operative word for me and so difficult to achieve instead of being our authentic subjective selves.

                                – In decision-making, different cultures have very different minimum thresholds of evidence required to render direction.

                                After reflecting on this matter, my initial list (5 in number) of what matters are the following attributes, pretty much all of which we have discussed before:

                                – The environment enabled by the leadership must as a minimum be one of a safe space, and one that is not risk-averse.

                                – In a perfect world, those one would recruit to a complex project would be attracted (not ‘voluntold’) based on their past lived experience, passion for challenge, seasoning and the scars obtained in a follower and team member capacity as a minimum, if not in some leadership role.

                                – As we have said before, anyone who can be developed to thrive in the uncertainty of complexity needs first to have an open-minded worldview built on curiosity, from which such skills as critical thinking and active listening can be developed, along with the pursuit of emerging practices like polarity management and structured collaboration.

                                – Patience is essential when there is no clarity in what to do, because one must adopt the Cynefin formula of “probe (try something), sense (the reaction) and (only then) respond” amid complexity.

                                – Because leaders may not have (some would argue rarely ever have) the emotional intelligence to be able to deal effectively with the myriad of surprises and what they perceive as bad news as a result of emerging risks and multiple significant issues, resilience in the form of a thick skin is also important.

                                This leads me to suggest that your suggestion might be worth considering as a potential new working group journey of discovery. What say others?  Ian

                                Davin Shellshear
                                SIG Chair
                                  @davin-shellshear
                                  Post count: 161
                                  Up
                                  0
                                  ::

                                  Hi Group B

                                  I doubt that any of our gents is seriously going to have a go at Ian.

                                  I agree that ‘the complexity aspects are the emerging risks (especially from stakeholders) from the earliest planning stages, through to sourcing of an implementing supplier and their subcontracted/partner team, to then getting into detailed design, construction, early delivery, and decisions on how to reach initially planned scope or to accept diminished scope to stay closer to timeline and/or budget.’

                                  As we have said from time to time, the major source of emerging complexity is people, whether they be stakeholders, managers, project leaders, Seniors, Ministers, or just others. I wonder if there is any interest in focusing on that aspect of complexity – why do people muck up our projects (and keep Bent Flyvbjerg in work), why can’t some people work with uncertainty and others can, how do we pick (if we have that choice) people who can work with complexity, how can we develop ‘leaders’ who can lead in a complex world, why can’t people collaborate whilst espousing the benefits of collaboration, how can we keep relationships effective by keeping people out of them, and other questions of life.

                                  If people are the solution and the problem, what can we do?

                                  Just to amuse myself, I have attached a paper which plays in this space of confusion.

                                  For your amusement, and perhaps interest.

                                  Cheers

                                  Davin

                                  Attachments:
                                  You must be logged in to view attached files.
                                Viewing 15 posts - 76 through 90 (of 472 total)
                                • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.