Dots

22/5/2017

‘People look for HD photos whereas what’s really possible is dots on a page.’

I met with an insightful strategy consultant last week who used this ingenious metaphor. We live in an era where leaders face increasing complexity, ambiguity and uncertainty. This can evoke anxiety, risk-aversion and paralysis in decision-making. Against this backdrop, it’s tempting to attempt to increase our certainty by gathering and analysing exhaustive (sometimes exhausting!) reams of data, information and evidence. It’s as if we may want and need to see a high definition photo where every detail is present and crystal clear before feeling confident enough to take a step forward.

I do get it. There are good reasons for basing decisions on research and evidence, especially in high-risk environments where to do otherwise could be reckless at best and dangerous at worst. Or if we miss great opportunities because we hadn’t looked well enough before leaping…or failing to leap. But what if such situations are the exception rather than the norm? What if ‘sufficient’ evidence is unavailable, or if it would take more time or other resources to gain it than we can afford, or if conditions are so complex and fluid that today’s truth fades quickly into tomorrow’s jaded history?

Picture this alternative. A blank sheet on which we place dots. We can place them wherever we want. The dots represent what we do know, what we have a gut feel for, what we could reasonably find out – if needed. We can add, remove or move dots as things progress. We can experiment with reconfiguring the dots into different, creative, shapes and patterns. We can play with colouring the space between the dots, around the dots, to see what picture, what possibilities, what passions emerge. I love this idea of the dots. Of joining the dots. Of steps in faith. Of creating future.

58 Comments

Robert Hodge

22/5/2017 10:58:38 pm

I always appreciate your thinking. Thank you for this on dots.
Some years ago, there were writings about organizational leadership that called for a leader to fill in the spaces between the boxes and lines, connecting people as people more than just isolated functionaries (dots). In defining the role of one person whom I coach, we have talked about her role as the CG - Chief Glue, as she has little positional power yet has a responsibility to make all things come together to work well. She gets little credit or visibility. One person suggested the metaphor of "mom" to note the highly valuable familial role and to highlight the sometimes lack of appreciation.
Dots by themselves have value. Connecting them may be the difference between success and failure.
Much of my thinking is exhibited in Venn diagrams. It is the overlap of contained spaces (or maybe dots) where opportunity or conflict arises, where innovation may occur, and decisions are to be made.

Nick Wright

23/5/2017 09:02:10 am

Thanks for your encouraging feedback, Robert. My first instinctive response to the idea of 'fill in the spaces between boxes and lines' was to colour outside the boxes and lines! ;) I like the idea of 'chief glue' - what an intriguing metaphor. I have worked played with groups using dots and other symbols to see what emerges.

For example, with one leadership team I invited participants to choose 5 dots that represented team members...then to configure the dots into how they see the team and its relationships currently...then into how they would like to see the team in the future.

One placed the dots in a straight line, another in the shape of a cross, another in a circle, another in a traditional hierarchical structure, another as randomly disconnected. It opened up fascinating and useful conversation in the team.

One insight that emerged was that team members reconfigured their relationships depending on what the team was focusing its attention on and what the wider organisation needed from it. This allowed an agile approach to working with each other and with others but also sometimes created gaps, tensions and confusion. Recognising that created opportunity for the team to discuss and how to decide to work in the future.

I like your idea of venn diagrams and what happens in the spaces (or dots) in between. Reconfiguring the dots sometimes has a radical impact on what opportunities and challenges come into view and what options are or can be available to deal with them.

Ben North

22/5/2017 10:59:25 pm

I like the thinking, but sometimes you need to start with the big dots to go from SD to HD. Definitely an aspirational idea.

23/5/2017 08:44:52 pm

Thanks Ben. Interesting comment. I think that what we consider to be the 'big dots' can open up very useful discussions about e.g. our assumptions, values, perspectives and strategic options.

Cath Norris

22/5/2017 11:00:02 pm

I love it Nick, start with what we've got...

23/5/2017 09:07:22 am

Thanks Cath. I think 'what we've got' can open up all kinds of interesting and valuable questions and conversations, particularly if we view it through, say, Gestalt and social constructionist lenses.

Arthur Lerner

22/5/2017 11:00:46 pm

I want to add to what Nick wrote and to Robert's insightful comment.
The placing of dots leads me to think about Hoshin Planning which is similar except the "dots" are specified, but can still be grouped in various ways for added insight and inspiration about what "fits" with what.

I have been thinking about connecting dots differently since meeting Prasad Kaipa 20+ years ago. One of his intellectual inventions was called pyradigm. Over simplified , if you place 3 dots in any position you will likely get a 2 dimensional image if you connect them. If you put a fourth dot, say, above the page, you have the cornerstones for a 3 dimensional object (tetrahedron). By drawing lines between each pair of points/cornerstones so each point/dot connects to two others what you get are four triangles instead of one, + 6 edges as connections keeping the whole thing aligned. It becomes a simple representation of a complex set of factors: Individual knowledge/expertise connected via process (line) so mutual interdependence is created creates 4 triangles needing each other to all stand as one "entity" with each one presenting now representing a "field" for a resulting organizational/interpersonal behaviors or understanding. Remove/weaken one process (line) or one cornerstone and everything collapses to one triangle. Coordination and interdependence are both understood and critical to success.

23/5/2017 09:10:38 am

Hi Arthur. I love that idea of shifting from a 2-dimensional triangle to a 3-dimensional one simply by adding another dot. It would be a great way of exploring, revealing and working with systems!

23/5/2017 04:32:36 pm

Nick - You are indeed astute. While it has other "standard" applications, that is how it is most commonly used. Usually it's about connecting goals to behaviors in some way. My favorite was designed for a group of mangers in Asia
Africa of a major U.S. corp. to deal with maintaining/increasing high performance and morale given the unlikelihood of most getting promoted high in the corp. They chose Empowerment in a way that work whatever the local culture. It is one of the few org. pyradigms not aimed at goal achievement, but quite powerful and useful.

23/5/2017 08:55:24 pm

Hi Arthur. I like the idea of cultural contextualisation. Too many models are applied mechanistically without paying attention to cultural beliefs, values, behavioural patterns and subtle nuances.

Lester Hirst

22/5/2017 11:01:33 pm

Great approach -- requires quite a bit of emotional intelligence!

23/5/2017 04:30:35 pm

Actually, it needn't always. It is most typically is used to promote greater systemic/interdependence awareness. The example noted to Nick certainly dealt EI, as do almost all the pyradigms constructed for individuals.

23/5/2017 08:46:30 pm

Thanks Lester. Interesting point! You may find this related short piece interesting: http://www.nick-wright.com/blog/spots Let me know what you think.

23/5/2017 08:52:49 pm

Nick, thanks for referring to your article. It is very insightful about the un/semi-conscious emotional barriers at play in organizations. I think what you discuss is at or near the root of why so many change - esp. change "management" - initiatives fall short. This isn't the place to get more expansive, but one of the benefits of certain large group/large scale methodologies is that they reveal the variety of perspectives, + and -, people in big orgs can have and find ways to address them in the open. Thanks, too, for references to other articles. I will read them soon.

23/5/2017 09:01:47 pm

Hi Arthur. I like your comment, 'people in big orgs can have and find ways to address (variety of perspectives) in the open.' It means that change efforts are more likely to be well-informed and engaging.

Ian Henderson

24/5/2017 09:54:51 am

Now that's different!

24/5/2017 09:56:02 am

Hi Ian. I agree. I wonder if it will appeal more to Myers-Briggs N-P types than, say, S-J..?! ;)

Pete Mosley

3/6/2017 06:35:42 pm

Brilliant article, Nick, as usual. What a fab way to get clarity into a complex situation. Much appreciated - thanks.

3/6/2017 06:36:38 pm

Thanks for such affirming feedback, Pete. Much appreciated.

Dori Staehle, MBA

3/6/2017 06:38:12 pm

Animated video. Pull the random dots together to create a solid picture. Could be cool. ;)

3/6/2017 06:38:58 pm

Nice idea, Dori - although 'random' may be a matter of perception..?

Subramanian Narayan

3/6/2017 06:40:03 pm

Like the idea 💡 of using dots with different sizes and colours. What is missing are the rules around the colours and sizes and the possibilities of connecting the dots including arrows.

3/6/2017 06:41:57 pm

Thanks Subramanian. 'Rules' is an interesting question. How would it be if we were to experiment without rules to see what new insights, patterns and possibilities may emerge?

Jackie Cummins

3/6/2017 06:43:08 pm

Should the dots be labelled with key words?

3/6/2017 06:44:56 pm

Hi Jackie. The notion of 'should' begs some interesting questions. It's one possibility...if we would find the words - like labels - useful and not unhelpfully limiting?

Kay Wakeham

3/6/2017 06:48:20 pm

What an innovative idea. Thanks for sharing.

3/6/2017 06:49:43 pm

Thanks Kay. Yes, I found it creative and stimulating.

Jim Ferran

3/6/2017 06:51:30 pm

There comes a time in the decision making process where too much information is as bad as too little. Acceptance and an understanding of the risk principles makes the decision making process easier. I always advocate the achievement of small marginal gains in the DM process as all too often people wait for the optimum moment which rarely appears. I watched a film recently, Eye in the sky, which drove the point about ' information hunger' home perfectly.

3/6/2017 06:52:09 pm

Hi Jim. 'Paralysis of Analysis' comes to mind.

Laura Miller

3/6/2017 06:52:46 pm

What a brilliant way to look at something that can be potentially terrifying and complex to many people who are new to 'strategic decision making'. Simplicity over complexity. Love it!

3/6/2017 06:56:58 pm

Thanks Laura. Yes, people in Western professional cultures often confuse 'simple' with 'simplistic' and, when it comes to decision-making, prefer rational over intuitive. I think the dots idea can allow radically different perspectives, paradigms, ideas, constructs and solutions to emerge.

Kim Hawkins

3/6/2017 06:57:43 pm

This is great. I've done something similar with sticky notes- my challenge was engaging the staff that like graphs and charts, rather than creative thinking. Will try the dots!

3/6/2017 06:59:22 pm

Thanks Kim. I would love to hear more about what you have tried - including with sticky notes and with people who prefer graphs and charts!

Uday Arur

5/6/2017 10:20:22 am

Which pain of failure is greater - having referred reams of data, acted and then failed, or connected the dots acted, and then failed? Perhaps, reflecting on this could help us arrive at our individual comfort zones.

5/6/2017 10:27:24 am

Thanks Uday. I think that's a great question. It would also reveal preferences and a sense of where we place our confidence - and why. An alternative framing could be, 'Which joy of success is greater...'

Lloyd D'Castro

5/6/2017 10:28:10 am

Good stuff, thanks.

5/6/2017 10:28:32 am

Thanks Lloyd.

Wendy Grenfell

5/6/2017 10:29:06 am

I like it!

5/6/2017 10:29:56 am

Thanks Wendy. That was my response too when the strategy consultant introduced her idea to me!

Arina Scholtz

5/6/2017 10:30:39 am

Great metaphor!

5/6/2017 10:31:23 am

Thanks Arina. I agree! :)

Michele Seymour

5/6/2017 10:32:13 am

I once took a somatic approach - client had a tendency to lean forward when walking , it mean that his sphere of view was limited. He could see the ground in front of him only. I got him to stand against wall and I put a pencil between the wall and his 'leaning forward' upper back ....he could visibly measure his 'leaning' incline. I then invited him to lift his posture and therefore his head by breathing upwards and asked him what he saw ....'much more' he said. And therefore the longer view and bigger picture was more available to him , he could breath with more ease too so oxygenating his brain better. His walk slowed down as he became more conscious of his habitual determined drive to get things done ( operational ) versus the more considered and open posture needed to be more strategic. He agreed to a daily practice of changing his posture 5 x a day so his neural pathways could reconfigure to get the musculature to change and to give him the practise of switching between postures.

5/6/2017 10:35:14 am

Hi Michele. Thanks for sharing such a creative and inspiring example from somatic practice. I love it! You may find this related case study-based article interesting? http://www.nick-wright.com/just-do-it.html

John b. May

5/6/2017 10:36:28 am

Have them keep constantly in mind the strategy and objectives of the organisation?

5/6/2017 10:46:21 am

Hi John. I think strategic thinking can be useful to re-think what strategic choices we have and what strategic decisions we may choose? In my experience, it's often about future/environmental scanning - although these can prove difficult in complex, fluid situations that are subject to multiple and often unpredictable influences. This is where the 'dots' approach could, perhaps, allow greater responsiveness and agility?

Phillip Rutherford Ph.D FAITD FAIM

5/6/2017 11:10:18 am

This is a phenomenon I have been researching for over a decade now. Research for my Ph.D came up with some very interesting insights which I have employed in programs aimed at enhancing decision making in complex and asymmetric environments during training with Defence and Special Forces folk.

I have found that there are two aspects which must also be considered when thinking about what you've called 'strategic decision-making', and these are (a) the way knowledge is used within the organisation, and (b) the way in which each of us is trained to use knowledge, and in particular the role that neuroplasticity plays in reframing the brain to employ knowledge as and when it is needed.

Immensely interesting IMO.

5/6/2017 11:11:46 am

Thanks Phillip. Your research sounds interesting. Do you have any examples you could share from experience to illustrate what the two aspects you mention could look like in practice?

Sekararajan Balagurunathan

5/6/2017 11:13:11 am

With illustrative examples from commonly known sources.

5/6/2017 11:15:36 am

Hi Sekararajan. Illustrative examples can certainly help to show what strategic thinking and decision-making can look like and involve, drawing on other people's and organisations' approaches to it. I wonder how else you might develop people's own strategic thinking skills...perhaps, at times, in contrast to 'received wisdom'?

Larry Tyler

5/6/2017 02:50:18 pm

You start with empowering them to make decisions. A lot of the big box companies that I have worked for want you to be executes of directives not decision makers and they are now paying for that thought process.

5/6/2017 02:50:57 pm

Hi Larry. Do you have any examples to illustrate what you mean?

Natascha Lavery

6/6/2017 09:03:42 am

What are your ideas in training people to strategise, Nick?

6/6/2017 09:10:58 am

Hi Natascha. My main area of experience is in developing strategic thinking. This could include conventional future/environmental scanning or dealing with VUCA (volatility, uncertainty, complexity, ambiguous) environments.

It's often around using or creating great questions, e.g. 'What are the key questions that, if we were to address them, would enable us to make strategic decisions?' (Gray).

My main interest, however, is in psychological aspects of strategic thinking. Here is a recent example of an approach I have developed to use with strategic leadership teams: http://www.nick-wright.com/blog/spots

Kelly Williams

7/6/2017 09:09:22 am

Hi Nick, I like the set up to the figure a lot. The reason we see this challenge amongst leaders can be explained by brain functions. 75% of the population is what I call 'interpolative' or as MBTI would refer to as 'sensing' and neuroscience would say is someone who uses the dorsal pathway. They are the ones that things need to make sense to them. They can get extreme anxiety when burdened with major decisions and they just cannot get the picture on the jigsaw puzzle box that does not exist. 25% of the population are what I call 'extrapolative' or as MBTI would refer to as 'intuitive' and neuroscience would say is someone who uses the ventral pathway. They are the ones that make sense out of things. They thrive in this environment. And they are the ones that disrupt markets and start today tomorrow's next batch of the Fortune 500. But they get replaced by the efficiency experts who excel at the Weberian bureaucracy. https://medium.com/@Ultimate_Human_Dilemma

7/6/2017 09:10:37 am

Thanks Kelly. Yes, I'm sure personal and cultural preferences are influencing factors on which approach people and organisations feel comfortable and confident with.

Wai K. Leong, MCC

8/6/2017 08:44:51 am

Excellent metaphor.

8/6/2017 08:45:08 am

Thanks Wai. I agree.

Yomna Salem link

9/9/2018 08:48:51 pm

An interesting metaphor

Dots

Leave a Reply.

Nick Wright

Archives

Categories

Dots

Leave a Reply.

​Nick Wright

​Archives

Categories

Nick Wright

Archives