LSW#33🏟️Poking Life in Organizations
We have more options than we usually think
Giants and minions
Life can be much broader once you discover one simple fact, and that is: Everything around you that you call life was made up by people that were no smarter than you. And you can change it. You can influence it.
… And the minute that you understand that you can poke life, and … if you push in, something will pop out the other side, that you can change it. You can mold it.
That's maybe the most important thing is to shake off this erroneous notion that life is there and you're just going to live in it, versus embrace it.
—Steve Jobs, in a 1994 interview
Usually, this video gets shared in the context of founders and building companies. But Jobs’ notion of “poking life” and “erroneous notions” is equally applicable to working inside organizations, particularly larger setups.
It’s easy to reify organizations and leaders — thinking of them as giant monoliths and know it alls — where “little us” cannot have an impact. But this is mistaken, and a disempowering notion.
Insidious fallacies
We typically fall for four fallacies [1] stemming from this way of looking at things. They limit our available action set.
The should-be fallacy
Thinking that whatever is, SHOULD be a certain way.
Most commonly found as “best practices” that are installed top-down rather than paying attention to what’s already working organically.
Do enough “poking” to see what works best, rather than assuming that the best practice will work for you.
The must-be fallacy
The belief that whatever is, MUST be, and that whatever exists, exists because there is sufficient reason for it.
We’re falling for the idea of an all-knowing intelligent designer (think founders like Jobs) who put things into play. Easy to fall for when you’re working for a billion dollar corporation.
The always-will-be fallacy
Thinking that the way things are now, is the way it’ll ALWAYS be.
Extrapolation makes the world feel safer and more predictable, but it also prevents seeing differently, or envisioning a different future.
The safety fallacy
The belief that doing what others are doing is the SAFEST way to operate, or the most optimal.
Following the herd is logical for the most part. Except you can think for yourself, and it might not be best for you.
These are fallacies which means, by definition, we’re mostly unaware of them, but they nevertheless influence the kinds of actions we take, and don’t take.
Complex adaptive systems
Organizations can be thought of as a type of complex adaptive system. The science of CAS is pretty involved. To keep it simple, consider the difference between a watch and the traffic in a city:
Some systems are simple and nonadaptive. You can learn how they work by learning about their parts. They don’t change based on their environments. For instance, imagine a basic pocket watch. You can take it apart to figure out how it works, and it keeps working the same regardless of what goes on around it—within limits.
Complex adaptive systems have properties that are greater than the sum of their parts. You cannot understand them from studying their individual components, which may be simple but which interact in unpredictable, nonlinear ways.
A few, often basic rules enable the parts to self-organize without centralized control. The way the various components interact and pass information between themselves creates complexity. A system's ability to change in response to its environment and in pursuit of a goal makes it adaptive. Complex adaptive systems have “memories”—they are impacted by what has happened to them before.
One example of a complex adaptive system is the traffic within a city. While cars are simple systems in the sense that the way they work is a logical outcome of all of their parts working together, when we look at the combined interactions of cars, we see remarkable self-organization. Traffic changes its behavior based on information from its environment. Focusing on one car won’t teach you about the entire system because what matters is the interactions between them.
In Complexity: A Guided Tour, Melanie Mitchell defines a complex system as one “in which large networks of components with no central control and simple rules of operation give rise to complex collective behavior, sophisticated information processing, and adaptation via learning or evolution.”
Within complex adaptive systems, components are all interdependent. They can directly or indirectly influence the behavior of the entire system.
— Rhiannon Beaubien & Rosie Leizrowice in The Great Mental Models Vol 3
Two primary takeaways in the context of organizations:
There’s no one person in charge (even though it might look that way), let alone anyone who knows everything.
Small actions of one agent can change entire systems. Will it change anything on day one? Probably not. But do it long enough, and eventually, you start seeing ripple effects that can potentially change not just you, but the system itself.
Applying this to work
What does this mean in the practical day-to-day grind of work?
Org charts are misleading, even harmful. They are simplified portrayals of a more complex reality.
Work doesn’t get done the way org charts show it, but instead through a network of interlinked groups, all of which have localized leadership and, if I may use the term, “influencers”. Understanding a company, and basing your actions, through org charts is ineffective and confusing.
A simple example is the US Senate. Most of the work gets done behind the scenes through associates and, unfortunately, lobbyists. Thinking of Senators as the only actors limits potential actions and how you participate. The CEO or VP’s decision involved numerous inputs from specific folks at various levels. From that perspective, it’s not really they who took the actual decision.
Recognize that organizations and leadership are socially constructed – built from the ideas, interactions, and agreements between people.
From this perspective, organizations are a collection of promises and conversations between various stakeholders. This means you can participate by injecting yourself into the “conversations of the organization”. This makes the stakes much smaller, and actions as simple as one-on-one interactions.
Don’t accept the status quo.
If that’s what you want, fine. But if you intend to create change, don’t underestimate the extent of your impact, regardless of your position in the hierarchy.
Accepted wisdom is popular for a reason.
But that doesn’t mean it’s always right. Too often, the solution to a sticky problem is two or three questions removed from someone more persistent than the average person.
No one’s figuring it out for you.
Your career is not your organization’s responsibility, let alone your manager. Finding the right fit and environment is a lifelong pursuit. Keep “poking” until you find it.
Don’t assume they have it all figured out.
Everyone’s busy solving the puzzle, even winging it, at various levels, including the CEO and down to first-line managers. Some are better at hiding it than others. This is great because it means you can help them out.
Pay attention to your own attention, and respect your own opinions.
We tend to have a bad habit of dismissing our own takes and viewpoints. One reason is thinking that, everyone sees this, or that it’s obvious. It’s not. What you’re seeing, often, has unique value. But you’ll have to work to help others see the same way.
Further reading
[1] The framework of fallacies is from intelligence researcher Robert J Sternberg and his idea of creativity as a decision first. I extended his framework in the context of leadership : Leadership as a decision first, ability second.
Complexity helps explain why we copy leaders. It’s simply the most intelligent action when operating in uncertainty.
If organizations are built out of conversations, then effective leadership is about effective conversations.
Given the opaque nature of complex systems, strategy for most folks is more akin to Tetris, not chess.
That’s it for today’s edition. If you found this useful, please share it and help spread the word. Thanks for reading.