The Cynefin Framework

From apppm
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(→‎Guide on leadership)
(→‎Guide on leadership)
Line 40: Line 40:
  
 
'''Framework for decision making in multiple contexts'''
 
'''Framework for decision making in multiple contexts'''
−
**indsæt tabel fra HBR, el. lign.
+
{|class="wikitable" style="margin: auto;"
 +
|
 +
|'''Characteristics of <br>context'''
 +
|'''The leaders job'''
 +
|'''Danger signals'''
 +
|'''Response to danger <br>signals'''
 +
|-
 +
|'''Simple'''
 +
|XXXX,hhh
 +
|jajaj
 +
|nejnejnej
 +
|
 +
|-
 +
|'''Complicated'''
 +
|XXXX,hhh
 +
|jajaj
 +
|nejnejnej
 +
|
 +
|-
 +
|'''Complex'''
 +
|XXXX,hhh
 +
|jajaj
 +
|nejnejnej
 +
|
 +
|-
 +
|'''Chaotic'''
 +
|XXXX,hhh
 +
|jajaj
 +
|nejnejnej
 +
|
 +
|}
  
 
==Examples of contexts==
 
==Examples of contexts==

Revision as of 09:40, 19 November 2014

The Cynefin Framework

This article will introduce the Cynefin framework and its underlying practices, which can be used for sense- and decision making in a complex and complicated world. [1] The framework is developed by David J. Snowden (born 1 April 1954)[2], and is used by leaders to determine operative context so they can make appropriate choices.

The Cynefin framework splits the issues that faces leaders into five contexts; simple, complicated, complex, chaotic and disorder. Each of which requires different approaches to leadership style. [1][3]

Reflekter på hvordan det passer ind i APPPM


Contents

History

The Cynefin model

The Cynefin framework distinguieshes between order, unorder and disorder.[4] It describes five contexts that leaders can use for categorizing operating contexts for making appropriate choices. Each context requires different action.[1] The simple and complicated domains assume an ordered universe, where decisions can be based on facts, right answers can be determined and there is a direct link between cause-and-effect. Whereas the complex and chaotic domains are unordered and deals with uncertainty, there is no direct link between cause-and-effect, and decisions and right answers is searched for in emerging patterns. In the the final domain disorder is hard to determine when one is in it. different leaders have different opinions, and the way out is to break the situation down to smaller parts and assign the each one to one of the four domains. [1]

Order:
1. Simple contexts (known knowns)
The domain of best practice, known-knowns, here we know exactly what we are doing and we have done it before, so we sense, categorize and responds (S-C-R)

2. Complicated contexts (known unknowns)
The domain where we do not know what is going on, but we know that we can analyse what has happened and figure it out. We are sense, analyse and responds (S-A-R)

Unorder:
3. Complex contexts (unknown unknowns)
In the complex domain we can not determine what will be the outcome, but we can run some experiments and see if they will move us in the right direction. We probe, sense and respond (P-S-R). In this domain we can only understand what is happening in hindsight [1].

4. Chaotic contexts (unknowable unknowns)
In this domain, the domain of unknowables, it does not make sense to search for answers, no patterns exist - only turbulence. We act (do something), we sense where stability emerges and then we respond by working towards complexity (A-S-R)[1].

Disorder (not determined)
These are the situations where one are yet to break down and determine where the situation belongs in the framework.[1][4]

Guide on leadership

Ontology and ideology
In current management practices, the ideology that seem to exist assumes that there is an underlying relationship between cause and effect, and predicts that the future can be planned by discovering these underlying relationships. It is assumed that there is a right answer to problems/situations, and that failure hereof is a faliure of analysis of the underlying cause-and-effect relationships. [3]

This is seen in the reliance of case studies and consultancy frameworks, that rely on transferring best practices across companies and industries. [5]

    • reflekter over hvilket paradigme det passere ind i lecture 20

Framework for decision making in multiple contexts

Characteristics of
context 		The leaders job Danger signals Response to danger
signals
Simple XXXX,hhh jajaj nejnejnej
Complicated XXXX,hhh jajaj nejnejnej
Complex XXXX,hhh jajaj nejnejnej
Chaotic XXXX,hhh jajaj nejnejnej

Examples of contexts

  • Examples of simple contexts
  • Examples of complicated contexts
  • Examples of Complex contexts
  • Examples of Chaotic contexts
  • Examples of Disorder

Examples of uses

Cynefin used in projects
The Cynefin framework can be used in projects as a sense-making tool and as a common language for dealing with complexity[1][6]. When using the framework for project management, Snowden emphasizes using the framework as a collective sense-making method that allows specific patterns to emerge in the understanding of the project [6].

Snowden's idea with sense-making in projects is to provide a common understanding of language depending on the environment. Snowden claims that experts' language is too restricted and abstract for managing complexity in project work, and remains about the problem but still far above it[6]. Snowden therefore emphasizes the role of language in sense-making about complexity in projects and especially as a communicator to create meaningfull messages that are informative, comprehensive and not oversimplified [3][6].

  • Cynefin used in Ergonomics

Criticism

  • Critical reviews of the Cynefin Framework
  • Risk of oversimplifying the problems

Additional reading

Cynefin framework explained by David J. Snowden
  • Article: Harvard business review: Snowden, David J., and Mary E. Boone. "A leader's framework for decision making." [1]
  • Article: Snowden, Dave. "Strategy in the context of uncertainty." Handbook of Business strategy 6.1 (2005): 47-54. [3]
  • Article: Hasan, Helen, and Alanah Kazlauskas. "The Cynefin framework: putting complexity into perspective." (2014): 55. [4]
  • Article: Jarrar, Yasar F., and Mohamed Zairi. "Best practice transfer for future competitiveness: a study of best practices." Total Quality Management 11.4-6 (2000): 734-740. [5]
  • Article: Browning, Larry, and Thierry Boudès. "The use of narrative to understand and respond to complexity: A comparative analysis of the Cynefin and Weickian models." E: CO 7.3-4 (2005): 32-39. [6]
  • Article: 'Cynefin Centre: Life after IBM' 2005, KM World, 14, 7, pp. 1-26, Business Source Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 14 November 2014.
  • Article: Elford, W. (2012). A multi-ontology view of ergonomics: applying the Cynefin Framework to improve theory and practice. Work, 41, 812.

Bibliography

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 Snowden, David J., and Mary E. Boone. "A leader's framework for decision making." harvard business review 85.11 (2007): 68.
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 University of Van Pretoria, 2014
  3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 Snowden, Dave. "Strategy in the context of uncertainty." Handbook of Business strategy 6.1 (2005): 47-54.
  4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 Hasan, Helen, and Alanah Kazlauskas. "The Cynefin framework: putting complexity into perspective." (2014): 55.
  5. ↑ 5.0 5.1 Jarrar, Yasar F., and Mohamed Zairi. "Best practice transfer for future competitiveness: a study of best practices." Total Quality Management 11.4-6 (2000): 734-740.
  6. ↑ 6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 Browning, Larry, and Thierry Boudès. "The use of narrative to understand and respond to complexity: A comparative analysis of the Cynefin and Weickian models." E: CO 7.3-4 (2005): 32-39.
Retrieved from "http://wiki.doing-projects.org/index.php?title=The_Cynefin_Framework&oldid=878"
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Toolbox