From: jimruttshow8596
The Cynefin framework, created by Dave Snowden, originated from his work in Knowledge Management at IBM, specifically while looking at informal and formal systems [02:32:00]. Over time, it evolved into a complexity and form framework [02:44:00].
Core Principles
The framework operates on the fundamental principle that there are three primary types of systems: ordered, complex, and chaotic systems [02:48:00]. It acknowledges that phase shifts occur between these states [02:52:00].
Solid, Liquid, Gas Metaphor
Snowden often uses the metaphor of solid, liquid, and gas to illustrate these system states and their phase shifts [02:55:00]. This metaphor also introduces the concept of a “triple point” [03:03:00], where something is equiprobable of becoming solid, liquid, or gas [03:07:00].
The Apparatic Domain
In the Cynefin framework, this triple point is called the “apparatic domain” [03:10:00]. The term “apparatic,” known to every Greek school child but less so in the West, signifies a question that can only be answered by thinking differently about the problem; it cannot be straightforwardly answered [03:18:00]. Apparatic moments are crucial in a crisis, pushing people into a state where they cannot rely on previous ways of seeing things [00:56:40].
The framework further divides the “ordered” domain into two sub-categories: clear and complicated, and also incorporates the concept of liminality, making it a three-level framework [03:30:00].
Complex vs. Complicated Systems
A key distinction within the Cynefin framework and in applied complexity science is between the complex and the complicated [03:41:00].
- Complicated: Derives from the Latin root “to unfold” [03:51:00]. A complicated system can be unfolded and folded, remaining the same thing [04:00:00]. It can typically be taken apart and reassembled [04:59:00], as its logic is implicit in the design’s statics [05:05:00] (e.g., a lawnmower motor or a Boeing 777 [05:34:00]). Human beings are good at making things complicated to achieve predictability [04:12:00].
- Complex: Originates from the Greek root “entangled” [03:55:00]. A complex system is constantly shifting and changing [04:06:00]. It cannot be taken apart and put back together to work the same way, as much of the information is in its dynamics [05:08:00] (e.g., a human cell or an economy [05:18:00]). When a complex system is mistakenly assumed to be complicated, radical errors occur [04:19:00]. A complex system is like bramble bushes in a thicket, where everything is entangled, and unintended consequences are certain [04:32:00].
Causality and Emergence in Complex Adaptive Systems
In a complex adaptive system, there is no linear material causality [06:07:00]. While such a system has dispositionality and is modulated, it lacks causality in any meaningful sense [06:13:00]. This is why it offers a radically different way of viewing the world [06:22:00]. Even deterministic complex systems often pass through deterministic chaos, making cause and effect impractical to map [06:31:00].
The properties of the whole are always different from the properties of the part, as seen in superconductors where electron behavior doesn’t predict the emergent superconductivity [06:44:00]. Discovering emergence is a key aspect of working with complexity [07:10:00].
Constraints
Constraints are crucial in Snowden’s lens [07:41:00].
- Enabling vs. Governing Constraints: An important distinction is made between enabling constraints and governing constraints [07:51:00]. Ordered systems are generally governed (contained), whereas complex systems are connected [07:57:00].
- Boundaries vs. Connectivity: Most systems thinkers define systems by boundaries, but from a complexity perspective, everything is connected, and connectivity matters more than boundaries within the system [08:03:00].
- Managing Constraints: Constraints can be mapped and changed [08:31:00]. One cannot control the output of a complex system; instead, one must describe the current state and identify what can be done next [08:35:00]. This aligns with the “next right thing” concept and the adjacent possible [09:16:00]. Knowing which constraints are in play allows for their management and thus influences emergence [09:34:00].
- Modulators: Constraints and Constructors are the two main types of modulators [10:40:00]. Mapping these is the critical first step in managing a complex system [10:46:00]. The more modulators controlled, and with real-time feedback, the more influence one has over the system’s outcome [10:24:00].
Open Systems
Complex systems are regarded as inherently open, or at least semi-permeable, to an outside [11:19:00]. At the system level, they are not subject to the second law of thermodynamics [12:04:00]. This contrasts with traditional systems thinking, which often defines systems with boundaries, implying a closed nature [12:29:00]. Human systems, in particular, may exhibit short-term teleological cause, capable of generating energy in unforeseen ways as the system develops [12:17:00].
Application in Crisis Management
The Cynefin framework gained significant traction during the COVID-19 pandemic, shifting its market from early adopters to early majority [20:13:00]. The understanding of complexity helps manage “unknowable unknowns” – things that cannot be known until they happen [21:36:00].
Key actions suggested in a crisis using the framework include:
- Building Informal Networks: Humans rely on informal networks for decisions in a crisis, not formal systems [28:49:00]. This involves rapidly building dense informal networks across silos, for instance, through methods like “entangled trios,” which focuses on knowledge flow [29:25:00].
- Mapping Knowledge at the Right Granularity: Knowledge needs to be stored at a level of granularity that allows it to be repurposed quickly for novel situations [29:57:00], a concept known as exaptation in evolutionary biology [30:15:00]. The “right level” is achieved by breaking down an issue until agreement can be reached on its placement [32:08:00].
- Setting Draconian Constraints: In a crisis, leaders must act decisively and quickly to stabilize the situation, not necessarily to solve the problem directly, but to increase options for others [34:25:00]. This involves making “option-increasing decisions” [35:05:00].
- Comprehensive Journaling (Gamba): Advocating for continuous journaling instead of traditional reporting, which provides real-time, fine-grained data from multiple agents [39:30:00]. This approach reduces time burden on individuals and provides better data for organizations, supporting anticipatory alerts [40:36:00]. Such journaling also allows for “lessons learning” in real time, rather than relying on delayed “lessons learned” [44:06:00].
- Creating Specialized Crews: Forming focused, collective crews (e.g., continuity crew, journaling crew, devil’s advocate crew) based on roles and role interaction [48:43:00]. These specialized crews can possess emergent intelligence greater than the sum of their individual members [49:18:00].
- Maintaining Cadence and Control: During emergence from crisis, maintaining a consistent rhythm (cadence) is vital. It allows for sustained progress and adaptation through continuous use of sensor networks, informal networks, and distributed knowledge [01:05:07].
Strategic Interventions with Narrative Topographies
Instead of traditional strategy focusing on future goals, the framework emphasizes mapping the present and identifying the “adjacent possible” – where one can go next [01:06:10]. This is achieved by gathering micro-scenarios from the workforce, using the information to create “narrative topographies” [01:09:50]. These topographies are used for cultural, safety, and attitude mapping [01:11:11].
By asking questions like “what can I do tomorrow to create more stories like these and fewer stories like those?” [01:13:30], the framework supports a fractal representation of data, allowing different levels of an organization to derive relevant actions from the same source data [01:14:46]. This approach shifts focus from outcome management to “dispositional management” [01:21:20].
Connection to Constructor Theory
Snowden’s work is extending to apply Constructor Theory, a physics theory that focuses on enumerating what is impossible rather than the rules of what is doable [01:17:00]. This is manifested in “Esterline mapping,” which plots constraints on a grid based on the energy cost of change and the time to change [01:18:15].
- Counterfactual Line: A “counterfactual line” denotes actions that are too costly in energy or time to change [01:18:41].
- Liminal Line: A “liminal line” indicates things that cannot be changed by the current entity but might be changeable by someone else [01:19:00].
- Dispositional Management: The goal is to perform micro-actions to change the dispositionality of the system, making desired outcomes more probable and undesired outcomes less so [01:19:30]. This implies making “the energy cost of virtue less than the energy cost of sin” [01:20:12].
In human systems, a “Constructor” is something that produces a transformation as things pass through it or contact it [01:21:58], and unlike in physics, these constructors can change in the act of construction [01:22:11]. Counterfactuals also relate to people’s feelings as much as physical reality [01:22:21]. The fundamental principle is to establish what cannot change, knowing that whatever has the lowest energy gradient will prevail [01:22:59]. This concept echoes catalysis, where actions reduce the activation energy for desirable changes [01:23:27].