Category: Simplicity

Five Ways to Recognize Complexity

Post author By Occam's Edge
Post date August 14, 2020

Complexity is not particularly difficult to recognize. Most of us know it when we see it. The hard part is putting it into words and being able to discuss it in a way that is productive. The lack of a widely used framework prevents us from really tackling complexity head on.

Our recent research on recognizing, unraveling, and replacing complexity has begun to shine a light on how leaders think about complexity and how they recognize complexity in their organizations.

During our research we specifically asked executives how they recognize complexity in their organization. At a high level, they all made reference to the lack of speed in decision making and desired outcomes as being evidence of complexity. The analysis of their answers created five indicators that led executives to their conclusion.

Business performance – the ability to achieve results is a signal of a high performing organization. Of course, meeting your objectives does not necessarily mean that the business is not complex. On the other hand, continuously missing deadlines, key performance metrics, or even just your commitments are a signal that complexity is working its way through the organization.
Ambiguity – The lack of clarity slows down decision making and increases the number of interactions between people and departments. It opens up the opportunity for misunderstanding, interpretation, and misalignment. Creating clarity and building alignment was seen as key to success to many of our interviewees.
Employee engagement – Complexity creates a degree of frustration for employees. When complexity gets in the way employees find it difficult to understand why the organization doesn’t resolve the complexity and how the organization wants them to move forward. Complexity undermines individual employees in terms of understanding, empowerment, and learning.
Meetings – The issue of meetings was raised by almost all of our interviewees. Too many meetings, meetings to prep for meetings, and too many people are involved are felt to be indicative of complexity. Many of us have been in back to back meetings and wondered when am I supposed to get any real work done? In addition, the number of organizational layers in a meeting was called out as creating complexity along with poor meeting discipline, as this creates ambiguity and reduces clarity.
Accountability – The lack of accountability in organizations whether created by roles, organizational structure, or individual behavior adds to complexity. Siloed functions, combined with risk aversion, the fear of being wrong, and knowledge in the hands of the few are all indicators of complexity.

None of these indicators are evidence of complexity when experienced individually. It is when we notice multiple indicators that it becomes more of a signal than just a noise. Even then, the lack of a framework to discuss complexity makes it difficult for people to raise it as an issue, difficult for executives to take action, and difficult for the organization to adopt new ways of working together.

If you notice any of these indicators in your organization, or you have experienced them first-hand, please join the conversation and share your perspective.

Final Thought

As we discussed on LinkedIn recently, complexity is best evidenced by three things: how long it takes to get stuff done, how hard it is to do stuff, and how frustrating it is to be part of the process.

We’d love to hear from you.

Tags Behavior, Complexity, Recognize, Simplicity

Adoption Behavior Complexity Simplicity

How Complicated becomes Complex

Post author By Occam's Edge
Post date July 24, 2020

Photo by John Lockwood

Implementing a change in technology in an organization is never an easy thing. It is a complicated process which involves coordinating many moving parts, clear communication, and effective change management. As we discussed in our July 3rd blog post, Complex Versus Complicated, this type of business issue, whilst complicated, should not be complex. Why is that? The reason is that there are clear processes and tangible goals involved in transitioning a company from one technology system to another. Complexity is added only once people are factored into the equation. Let’s dive into this and see how people and more specifically behaviour add complexity.

Let’s take a real life example of this, the actors remaining nameless of course! A medium size international perishable foods production and distribution company had seen tremendous growth in the past decade with revenues and international presence expanding rapidly. In cases like these, it can be difficult for all parts of an organization to keep up. In this case, the company’s waste tracking system was left behind. Tracking waste during production gives an estimate as to how much actual inventory a company has post-production. Initially, the company’s original system would estimate how much waste occurred during production by using relatively simple, general projections based on previous years’ data. However, as the company expanded, it was no longer able to produce accurate estimations of how much inventory was actually available and was consistently underestimating the amount of waste during production. More production locations, more workers, more machines, more storage locations, and more transportation services all provided opportunities for increased waste.This consistent inaccuracy had implications throughout the organization, production orders were too low and profit projections were too high. This was the business imperative that resulted in the company identifying and implementing a new waste tracking and inventory estimation system. The new system, WasteTracker, would help identify and accurately measure specific points of waste along the production line. Working hand in hand with WasteTracker, the company began to integrate the new system. This was not a simple undertaking, as employees had been using the old system since before the company experienced its rapid growth.

Integrating the new system meant switching from relying on relatively simple overall projections to operating a more sophisticated program which identified waste points along the production line in detail. This meant employees needed to be retrained. Programs needed to be installed. Projections would have to be recalculated. These tasks, however, could be approached intuitively and methodically.

The transition to a new technology system as described above is clearly complicated, but it is not necessarily complex.

The complexity began once the change in systems was introduced to the people that would be using it without clear communication about its purpose. In this case, management did not allocate sufficient time and resources to ensure effective communications as well as a change management process to streamline and accelerate user adoption. Without proactive management, human behavior will often certainly lead to questions without clear answers.

Whenever you introduce new technology, employees face difficulties and challenges. In our example, some employees struggled to learn how to use the system, others were fearful that they would become redundant, and others were simply mistrustful of the technology. This is when and how complexity begins to materialize.

Key questions that arise from this example that we can all learn from.

How might management have helped employees to adopt to the new system, processes, and procedures?
For those employees whose role was changing, how should this have be handled productively and proactively?
In what manner can management enforce the use of the new technology?
What could management have done to address change management issues well in advance of implementation completion?

While these questions may be frustrating and time consuming to deal with in the midst of a large technology implementation, it is far more costly to leave them unanswered or simply hope things will sort themselves out. An employee struggling to learn and use a new system means they are completing work much less efficiently than they are otherwise capable. An employee fearful for their job may become less focused on their work. They might also, unconsciously, or consciously, spread their doubt to others. A worker still completing their work the ‘old way’ will be desynchronized with the rest of their team. Time will have to be spent reconciling their work with the new system. While installing a new system may be a straightforward exercise, getting employees to learn and adapt to a new system can quickly become complex.

Initially, the implementation of the new system was complicated, not complex. This was because there were straightforward processes and tangible goals. Complexity quickly emerged once human behavior was introduced without any mitigation from project leaders and management.

Lesson learned: introducing people problems, unless managed and proactively guided, causes complexity that can derail success.

Does change management exist in your organization and what does it look like?

We’d love to hear from you.

Adoption Behavior Complexity Simplicity

Simple versus Simplistic

Post author By Occam's Edge
Post date July 10, 2020

Photo by Coline Haslé

Last week’s blog post focused on the differences between complicated and complex. Our view is that the distinction is useful when approaching issues, designing solutions and driving adoption. Complicated and complex issues require different skill sets, approaches, and techniques to solving them.

This week we thought we would address the other side of the continuum; simple versus simplistic.

Merriam-Webster defines the word “simple” as “not hard to understand or do.” Simplicity can be described as clear and lacking in pretense. The adjective “simple” means plain, easy, ordinary, or uncomplicated. A simple solution to a problem is usually a good solution….It’s probably no shock to you that we are big fans of the acronym KISS.

“Simplistic,” meanwhile, is defined as “too simple” and “not complete or thorough enough.” The adjective “simplistic” generally has a negative overtone generally meaning “ overly simplified”. The important nuance being that it is characterized by extreme and often misleading simplicity. As we have been digging through this topic it struck me that people use the two words interchangeably these days.

Simplicity before understanding is simplistic; simplicity after understanding is simple.
Edward De Bono

Simplistic sounds so much fancier than simply saying “simply”!!! Yes, both “simple” and “simplistic” come from the same root, but the latter is considered an excessive example of the former. In other words, too much of a good thing! It’s really important to understand that they could not be more different. We are working with that realization because it is core to our mission at Occam’s. When you weave the understanding of the difference between simple and simplistic into your behaviour it will result in enhanced personal and professional interactions and relationships.

In terms of individual behavior we typically see examples at different ends of the Simple vs Simplistic spectrum as well as all the way across the spectrum.

Let’s start with the Simplistic end of the spectrum. Simplistic statements and behaviour are shallow with no depth. Descriptions and statements are broad and generic, quickly articulated and also easy to understand. Take a moment and put yourself in a scenario where you were delivering a message or action and you oversimplifed both the issue and the potential solution. I’m going to ask for some soul searching and self reflection with this next question. In those instances did you feel that you stepped into the situation where you were basically “winging it”. The reasons for it could be one or more of many: as a lack of comprehension or understanding of the facts, driven perhaps by prioritization, time constraints, and inexperience? Alternatively, you receive updates and requests from others that leave you with the sense that its now up to the rest of us to go figure it out!!

If you can’t explain it simply, you don’t understand it well enough.
Albert Einstein

The higher up you go in the career ladder the easier it becomes to slip into the art of being simplistic without even realizing it. When interacting with others its easy to slip into the excuse that your time constraints don’t allow you time to dig into the details or debate something. As a consequence it’s inevitable that you begin to come across as shallow or even dismissive.

So let’s reset with this thought: It’s not easy to be simple, but it’s unbelievably effective. On the other hand it is easy to be simplistic. The two are very different and should not be confused. However, how do you get from simplistic to simple? Because the reality is whilst you do have to start with being simplistic the reality is that you can’t end there.

Make it simple but significant.
Don Draper

The trick is to invest time in yourself. In every area of what you do and what you aspire to be you have to go from the simplistic level to a deeper dive so that you become real and credible. After a while this process becomes an integral part of who you are and how you operate and this results in a level of credibility, trust and influence that becomes part of how you are perceived and respected.

How would you self assess your behaviors on the simplistic to simple continuum?

We’d love to hear from you.

Behavior Complexity Simplicity

The Cost of Complexity

Post author By Occam's Edge
Post date June 26, 2020

Photo by Amy Elting

Organic growth increases the number and types of customers, products and suppliers within an organization. This adds both revenue and cost to the operating model but does so in a way that is consistent with the operations of the business. This type of growth maybe complicated but it isn’t necessarily complex.

Complicated issues are defined as ‘the state or quality of being intricate or complicated.’ Complicated issues are intuitive, have patterns and follow a set of rules. They can be resolved by breaking down the problem and understanding the cause and effect and implementing a solution. You can solve complicated issues in a repeatable manner.

Complex issues, however, are defined as something ‘consisting of many different and connected parts and not easy to analyze or understand.’ Complex issues are more difficult to diagnose and may have no rational explanation. They don’t follow any set rules or laws and are unpredictable in terms of outcomes. Examples of complex issues would include managing employees, merging two companies, or adopting a diversity and inclusion program.

As an organization grows it may become more complicated but it shouldn’t become more complex.

If you are a chocolatier, you’re operating a pretty simple business. Chocolate typically has five basic ingredients; Even when you make different chocolate varieties and different packaging for seasons, size etc it may become complicated but it isn’t complex.

Growing your chocolate business by acquisition on the other hand can become fairly complex. Your target acquisition needs to be receptive to the idea, at a price and terms you both can agree on. You need to agree on the benefits of joining forces and be able to persuade shareholders, customers, employees, suppliers, and regulators that it is a good idea. The successful pursuit and integration of an acquisition is a complex issue. Think about trying to grow this business by acquiring Artisan chocolate makers, which these days is so often the case for the major chocolate manufacturers!

Let’s switch gears and look at the US airline industry. Southwest Airlines began services on June 18, 1971, with three Boeing 737 and has predominantly operated the Boeing 737 for 49 years. Their strategy of operating only one type of aircraft for 49 years helped reduce the impact of complexity of their business and helped keep their operating costs one of the lowest in the industry. Even after acquiring AirTran Airways, Southwest chose to lease Airtran’s fleet to Delta rather than create variation in their flight operations.

Compare them to American Airlines who operate 20+ aircraft from four different manufacturers and you begin to see the difference in complexity between the two business models. Activities such as hiring, training and re-certifying a pilot to operate an aircraft may be complicated but it isn’t onerous. Even assembling and distributing safety manuals isn’t difficult. However, the operation of a business model which involves so many different skills, pay scales, seniority, operational procedures, and aircraft and you begin to see how complicated becomes complex.

Leaders, like Herb Kelleher, Southwest Airlines founder, make choices grounded in simplicity. Other leaders, over time, make choices that impact the shift from complicated to complex. In moving from complex to complicated we are adding future costs to our organization; costs that are not necessarily variable and certainly difficult to manage.

CASE STUDY – COMPLICATED TO COMPLEX

A large fresh produce distributor managed their entire revenue cycle on Excel. Developed by an excel guru when the business was small, this sophisticated set of worksheets continued to track orders and sales even as the company grew exponentially over a five year period. While perhaps not the best option, it worked. For a while. With no significant change to the revenue management system the spreadsheet soon became difficult to open and even harder to navigate. Only one person, the original creator, fully understood the mechanics of the reporting tool. Complicated had become complex and the business created a single point of failure as financial reporting became increasingly dependent on a single employee. What would happen if he were to leave? How would someone new be able to learn the intricacies of the spreadsheet? How long would it take? In the meantime, how is management able to effectively rely on, or judge, the insights without any ability for review?

As organizations become increasingly complicated we need to watch our for shifts to complexity. These shifts often create risk, add future costs, and reduce reliability.

Complexity is also one the largest sources of disengagement in the workforce. Complex operational issues make it increasingly difficult for employees to be successful. Complexity leads to ambiguity, misinterpretation, and misunderstanding which in turn results in a ‘me vs we’ attitude. In addition, complexity leads to a culture of restraint and mediocrity which negatively impacts productivity, efficiency, and effectiveness.

Leaders should consider not only how they are building their organization but how to do so with a view to minimizing complexity. Often we respond to growth by simply layering on top of our existing procedures a new set of activities and responsibilities. We don’t look at the organization and ask what was necessary before that we no longer need today. Looking at the organization with a view to unravelling the complexity that was previously laid down will go a long way to help improve bottom line results as well as employee engagement and job satisfaction.

Behavior Complexity People Simplicity

How complexity gets in the way of leadership, culture and wellness.

Post author By Occam's Edge
Post date April 2, 2020

Photo by Andreas Klassen

Modern management theory teaches us to create leadership positions with accountability for a broad scope of operations. Basically, a hierarchy shaped like a pyramid with defined spans of control. “Successful” leaders are generally found to grow their scope of authority through internal and external advancement, growth of their business enterprise, both organic and through M&A. During this time their day to day becomes more complex. They have more touch points with subordinates, peers, senior leaders and external stakeholders. There are more moving pieces to manage, more issues to resolve, and more solutions to implement. Change is inevitable: market changes, customer needs change, and employee needs change. In addition, special projects, industry events, networking, and planning & reporting activities all draw on a leaders ability to be successful.

Soon enough many reach burnout and stay in a position where they are ineffective. This has, since 1968, been referred to as “The Peter Principle”, an observation made by the Canadian educational scholar and sociologist, Dr. Laurence J. Peter, whereby employees are often promoted to their level of incompetency.

Complexity places pressure on three critical resources; time, energy, and capability. Time is finite for all of us and however much we attempt to do more with less there are only 24 hours in a day! Energy and capability differ from individual to individual but eventually it all catches up to us.

What complexity does is prevent you from doing what good leaders should be doing. Leading through influence and trust, mentoring and developing teams and planning for the future both from a business and talent perspective. Good leaders don’t just get results, they develop the next generation of leadership.

Complexity and leadership is partially what drives culture and behavior in your organization. Your words, actions, and behaviors show people what it’s really like to work at your organization. They show people who you really are, how to interact with you, and they mimic your behaviors.

The other impact is on the overall wellness of the leader, their direct reports, and their personal life. Complexity in the work place, being present with family, having ‘me’ time all draw down on the time, energy, and capability. This often leads to inner feelings of not being good enough, imposter syndrome, and lower self worth. Subordinates and family can become resentful, mistrusting, and resigned to your way of being. Resignations of staff, divorce, and estrangement are not uncommon and can often be attributed to an over aggressive work ethic caused by complexity.

For sure, there are hundreds of great leaders business across the globe, but there are thousands of mediocre ones and millions of future leaders.

Take a moment to think about the level of complexity that you deal with on a day to day basis and the impact it has on your being. In fact, I encourage you to take 30 minutes after reading this to ask yourself the following questions:

How many meetings do you attend a day?
Which of those meetings are really effective?
How much time do you spend informing others on status?
How would you describe your listening style, how would others describe it?
How much time did you spend yesterday on developing others?
When did you last spend time thinking and reflecting on your day?
How much time do you spend thinking about the future of the business?
Do you know who is looking for a job in your span of control?
How do you personally define success?
Where are you in that journey towards success?
What of all of your daily actions make you feel energized and fulfilled versus drained and discouraged?

Be honest with yourself. Write down your first thought, don’t over think it. When you look at your answers some things will become clear to you. Reflect on all your answers but pay particular attention to those answers which might require more consideration.

We’d love to hear from you. How much complexity is there in your organization and how does it impact you as a leader or as a future leader? For the courageous, send us the answers to your questions and we would be more than happy to be a sounding board for your reflections.

Tags Complexity, Culture, Leadership, Wellness

Adoption Complexity Innovation People Process Simplicity Technology Transformation

How to talk to your CEO about your Transformation Journey

Post author By Occam's Edge
Post date January 21, 2016

If you are about to embark on a transformational journey, or have already begun your journey, follow these guidelines and increase your chances of success.