The objective of Obolensky’s
game on the video “Who needs leaders” is for leaders to reflect on complexity
and chaos theory. The underlying understanding of how chaos theory works “is that
the more complex the situation and task, the less directive traditional
leadership is needed” (Obolensky, 2010). Reflecting on the overall exercise of
the video, I can detect all of Obolensky’s 8 principles. Within the first few
minutes of the video, we can experience the first three principles: clear individual
objective, a few simple rules, and a clear boundary. The examples of these are
when Obolensky explains the rules and instructions of the game. The
instructions of the game were: Choose two people at random as your reference
points and make slow movements to position yourselves at equal distance of
these two points. The only rules to the game were for participants not tell
anyone who their reference points were and not to change their reference points.
As you can see the objective, boundary, and the rules of the game were very
clear.
Once participants began
positioning themselves at equal distance of their reference points, we can see
the next three principles being applied to the game: continuous feedback,
skill/will of participants, and discretion and freedom of action. As the game
continues we can detect that all participants had the ability (skill) to judge
distance and move according to their reference points and the will to do the
exercise (Obolensky, 2010). By having all participants move slowly, we can see
that all the participants move according to their reference points. As this
happens, all participants gain the continuous feedback of their reference
points and adjust their positions accordingly.
In regards to discretion and
freedom of action, each participant had the freedom to act without the need to
ask and wait for permission from their reference points. Participants were
confident enough to move along on their own, to get the task of being at equal
distance from the reference points completed. This brings me to the next
principle of ambiguity and uncertainty. From the start of this game none of the
participants could predict where they would end up even as the game continued.
But, even though this game seemed chaotic and there was uncertainty on the
outcome of the game, participants still proceeded to participate. This leads me
to last principle, which is the underlying purpose of the game. Even though no
participant could predict the outcome of the game, all of the participants had
a unifying underlying purpose; which was to remain at equal distance of the
chosen reference points.
As it can be seen from the
complexity of this exercise, all 8 of Obolensky’s principles were experienced.
This exercise serves me as a first-view example of how complexity and chaos
theory work together. It might've seemed to participants as a game full of
chaos because there was no leader in-charge but underneath it all there was a
sense of order. There was order because everyone had a clear objective,
boundary, rules, and a unifying purpose. So, this impacts my view and
understanding of chaos theory because it shows me that if within an
organization there’s a clear objective and boundary, a few simple rules and a
unifying purpose, among other things, it will all come together in a form of
self-organization.
The implication that chaos
theory has on strategy is unknown to me, as I have not had the opportunity to
create a strategy in an organization. From my basic understanding of strategy,
strategy typically involves a detailed plan of action designed to help the
organization achieve a mission or goal. According to Levy, “long term planning
is difficult in a chaotic system. The notion that long term planning for
chaotic systems is not only difficult but essentially impossible has profound
implications for organizations trying to set strategy based on their
anticipation of the future. Rather than expend large amounts of resources on
forecasting, strategy planning needs to take into account a number of possible
scenarios. Moreover, too narrow a focus on a firm’s core products and markets
might reduce the ability of the organization to adapt and be flexible in the
face of change. The implication for business strategy is that the entry of one
new competitor or the development of a seemingly minor technology can have a
substantial impact on competition in an industry” (Levy, 1994).
In my opinion, the
implication would be that leaders should not spend so much time planning out
every detail of the strategy. The information provided by Levy, leads me to
believe that strategy planning on a chaotic system can be done but on a shorter
term. Since things can change within and outside of an organization, it is
important for an organization to have a strong clear objective and boundaries,
and underlying unifying purpose, a few simple rules, continuous feedback,
skill/will of employees, discretion and freedom of action, and to embrace
ambiguity and uncertainty in order to quickly adapt to the changing conditions
of the environment within which it operates.
Reference:
Levy, D. (1994).
Chaos theory and strategy: theory, application, and management implications. Strategy
Management Journal, 15, 170. Retrieved February 15, 2014, from http://www.academia.edu/947922/Chaos_Theory_and_Strategy_Theory_Application_and_Managerial_Implications
Obolensky, N.
(2010). Complex adaptive leadership embracing paradox and uncertainty.
Farnham, Surrey: Gower.
No comments:
Post a Comment