One of my favourite eponymous laws is Greenspun’s tenth rule:

Any sufficiently complicated C or Fortran program contains an ad hoc, informally specified, bug-ridden, slow implementation of half of Common Lisp

Any self-respecting sceptic should memorise Hanlon’s Razor:

Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity

Anti Patterns in management, architecture, software engineering and life are codified in these pithy observations:

• Clarke’s three laws
• First law: When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.
• Second law: The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible.
• Third law: Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
• Amara’s law – "We tend to overestimate the effect of a technology in the short run and underestimate the effect in the long run."
• Bradford’s law – a pattern that estimates the exponentially diminishing returns of extending a library search.
• Brooks’ law – "Adding manpower to a late software project makes it later."
• Campbell’s law – "The more any quantitative social indicator is used for social decision-making, the more subject it will be to corruption pressures and the more apt it will be to distort and corrupt the social processes it is intended to monitor.”
• Classen’s law – Theo Classen’s "logarithmic law of usefulness" – ‘usefulness = log(technology)’.
• Conway’s law – “Any piece of software reflects the organizational structure that produced it.“
• Dilbert principle – "the most ineffective workers are systematically moved to the place where they can do the least damage: management."
• Gall’s law – "A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that worked."
• Gibrat’s law —"The size of a firm and its growth rate are independent."
• Goodhart’s law – “When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure.”
• Hanlon’s razor – a play on Occam’s razor, normally taking the form, "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." Alternatively, "Do not invoke conspiracy as explanation when ignorance and incompetence will suffice, as conspiracy implies intelligence."
• Hawthorne effect – A form of reactivity whereby subjects improve an aspect of their behaviour being experimentally measured simply in response to the fact that they are being studied.
• Herblock‘s law – "If it’s good, they’ll stop making it."
• Humphrey’s law – “conscious attention to a task normally performed automatically can impair its performance.”
• Hutber’s law – "Improvement means deterioration."
• Kranzberg’s first law of technology – “Technology is neither good nor bad; nor is it neutral.”
• Littlewood’s law – “individuals can expect miracles to happen to them, at the rate of about one per month.”
• Mooers’ law – "An information retrieval system will tend not to be used whenever it is more painful and troublesome for a customer to have information than for him not to have it."
• Muphry’s law – "If you write anything criticising editing or proofreading, there will be a fault of some kind in what you have written."
• Poe’s law (religious fundamentalism) – "Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humour, it is impossible to create a parody of fundamentalism that someone won’t mistake for the real thing."
• Rothbard’s law – “Everyone specializes in his own area of weakness.”
• Sayre’s law – "In any dispute, the intensity of feeling is inversely proportional to the value of the stakes at issue."
• Segal’s law – "A man with a watch knows what time it is. A man with two watches is never sure."
• Skitt’s law – "Any post correcting an error in another post will contain at least one error itself," or, "The likelihood of an error in a post is directly proportional to the embarrassment it will cause the poster."
• Sowa’s law of standards – "Whenever a major organisation develops a new system as an official standard for X, the primary result is the widespread adoption of some simpler system as a de facto standard for X."
• Wirth’s law – “Software gets slower faster than hardware gets faster.”

Perhaps Nimmons’ law of Anti Pattern avoidance should be:

The value of an eponymous law is less attributable to the reputation of its namesake, than to the calamitous Anti Pattern it helps avoid.

Thanks to my good friend and Open Innovation cohort Francisco De-araujo-roso Pinheiro, for signposting some interesting posts on the 15inno group on LinkedIn from Stefan Lindegaard, and some of the academic work he is guiding with EOI Innovation students.

Please read, ruminate, cogitate and feedback to Stefan (a prolific Open Innovation practitioner and commentator) as to the content of the 15inno articles.

15inno

Tap the brain of Stefan Lindegaard and network with corporate innovators!
http://www.15inno.com/2012/02/23/15innocorporatenetwork/

Open Innovation, Crowdsourcing in the Public Sector – 11 Great Reads
http://www.15inno.com/2012/02/23/publicsectorreads/

Innovation That Works!
http://www.15inno.com/2012/02/22/innovation-that-works/

Statoil and Shell: Fighting for Innovation Partners
http://www.15inno.com/2012/02/20/statoilshell/

Examples of Using Social Media for Innovation
http://www.15inno.com/2012/02/03/smexamples/

5 Ways to Get Better Innovation With Less Money
http://www.15inno.com/2012/01/17/betterinnovationlessmoney/

Communication is Key to Successful Open Innovation
http://www.15inno.com/2012/01/15/communicateopeninnovation/

Francisco’s Work in Open Innovation

Open Innovation and/or User-Lead Innovation (work submitted by Francisco’s EOI Innovation students)

Please review, encourage and support the next wave of Open Innovation thinkers.

1. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/francescomazzeo/2012/02/06/open-innovation-society-participation/

2. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/jonathancabrero/2012/02/12/innovation-growth/

3. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/lauraambros/2012/02/09/open-innovation-and-lead-user-innovation/

4. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/albertorengel/2012/02/12/open-innovation-lead-user/

5. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/carloscerdan/2012/02/12/open-innovation-the-present-and-future-of-innovation/

6. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/dianapatriciasanchez/2012/02/13/open-and-lead-user-innovation/

7. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/pablogonzalezvina/2012/02/14/open-innovation/

8. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/alfonsomedal/2012/02/12/open-innovation-from-why-to-what/

9. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/alfredoperaita/2012/02/10/innovative-world/

10. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/antoniocalixtomoreno/2012/02/13/%E2%80%9Copen-innovation%E2%80%9D/

11. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/elisaroman/2012/02/11/move-fast-break-things-facebook/

12. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/ildikoheim/2012/02/13/innovation-class-the-innovation-for-development-initiative-alias-openlead-user-innovation-for-good/

13. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/pedropernas/2012/02/09/lead-user-innovation-of-innovation-blog/

14. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/piotradamlubiewa/2012/02/07/innovation-what-is-open-innovation/

15. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/rubenpardo/2012/02/11/innovation/

16. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/amayasayas/2012/02/12/open-innovation-and-lead-user-innovation/

17. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/federicocamino/2012/02/12/open-innovation-shifting-to-a-more-efficient-business-model/

18. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/laurenmusiello/2012/02/12/open-innovation/

19. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/marieglueck/2012/02/12/why-companies-have-to-open-their-doors-and-how-to-do-it-innovation/

20. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/cristinagarcia-ochoa/2012/02/11/open-innovation-the-apple-case/

21. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/hokumakarimova/2012/02/07/innovation-opening-doors-to-ideas/

22. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/ricardogarro/2012/02/12/open-innovation-and-user-lead-innovation-opposites/

23. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/javiersolano/2012/02/12/open-innovation-why/

24. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/mariadiez/2012/02/08/open-innovation-and-lead-user-innovation/

25. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/saraelizalde/2012/02/12/open-innovation/

26. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/alvarorodero/2012/02/13/be-opened-lead-them-lead-user-open-innovation/

27. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/elvirasaez/2012/02/11/open-innovation-open-up-your-mind/

28. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/patriciaperez/2012/02/07/innovation-blog-will-open-innovation-became-a-business-mainstream/

29. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/tabithahmkandawire/2012/02/13/innovation-more-benefits-from-open-innovation/

30. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/alexandrunicolaecosor/2012/02/11/open-innovation-lead-user/

31. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/lauranavas/2012/02/04/innovation-through-collaboration/

32. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/syafrinasharif/2012/02/12/open-innovation/

33. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/arturodelfresno/2012/02/12/innovation-trends-evolution-closed-open-and-lead-user-innovation/

34. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/lucapalma/2012/02/06/the-medical-mirror-a-mit-student-innovation/

35. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/davidgarciagonzalez/2012/02/10/open-innovation/

36. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/elenaarboleya/2012/02/12/innovating-for-companies/

37. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/tatianacasquero/2012/02/12/innovation-open-innovation-philips%C2%B4-approach-to-improve-people%E2%80%99s-lives/

38. http://www.eoi.es/blogs/fabiopinto/2012/02/15/innovation-open-innovation-lead-user-innovation/

The Quadruple Helix – Citizen Engagement in local innovation

I am currently researching a number of Open Innovation and Social Networking hypotheses using a specific Tech Cluster as the research vehicle. This work is at a very early stage, but I did want to share some interesting resources related to emerging thinking.

The Triple Helix model, designed by Etzkowitz and Leydesdorff (2000), focuses on the relations of universities, industry and governments. CLiQ promotes a Quadruple Helix innovation approach which essentially adds the citizen engagement dimension to the Triple Helix of universities, industry and government.

This sets a challenge for public authorities and the design and provision of future public services. I wrote in mid December (2011) about the possibility of community led Corporate Social Responsibility within ‘smart clusters’. CSR Lippe (run by the GILDE Business and Innovation Centre Lippe-Detmold) is looking at this in terms of:

CSR

consolidating the social commitment of individual companies and to motivate them to work together with other organisations and stakeholders to find solutions to regional challenges, such as the anticipated lack of skilled labour. The objective is to help companies to create a win-win situation, engaging with civil society in places such as schools, kindergartens, universities. Companies cooperate on a range of themes including:

• Improving the transition from education to employment
• Developing proposals for reconciling family and work
• Improving the integration of employees with a migrant background
• Safeguarding the employment potential of older employees
• Improving the visibility of CSR activities

I believe there is great potential in local (and cluster driven) CSR. Innovation networks can act as catalysts, leadership is needed to drive consensus, and this could come from social enterprise, not-for-profits, think tanks, or Venture Capitalists (perhaps with seed funding from the Big Society Bank).

Matchmaking

In the creation of dynamic Open Innovation ecosystems, matchmaking is a key function. The Sussex Innovation Centre New Product Network is an interesting example of this pattern in action:

Sussex Innovation Centre’s New Product Network actively seeks out and matches potential buyers for the products of its tenant companies. The Centre staff has to understand the portfolio of SME products and think laterally about how to sell them. They identify and even create a demand from a network of established businesses by asking ‘What are your problems/challenges?’ When the team successfully matches what a larger business needs to expertise in the start-ups, there is a potential route through to the market. For example, in a meeting with British Airways it emerged that the airline was seeking IT solutions for baggage handling processes and social networking for the Executive Club. This intelligence was passed on to start-ups on site and introductions were made. These links enable start-up companies to get feedback on products at an early stage from potential buyers and even engage in joint development to adapt the product exactly to the buyers’ needs.

SINC staff find ways to open doors in bigger companies. The Centre’s credibility means companies in the network will listen, give a window and take the call, which may not happen for an unknown SME. Connecting start-ups to supply chains and getting the first customer is the biggest difference incubators can make to an SME.

There are undoubtedly interesting business models for dedicated matchmaking, and ‘ad hoc’ matchmaking. I am interested in how we can stimulate ‘serendipity’ either through virtual interaction, or Open Innovation spaces.

Open Innovation Spaces

Munktell Science Park in Eskilstuna provides a case study about the ‘importance of physical space’ for Open Innovation. This makes for an interesting hypothesis as to whether virtual clusters are ‘innovation disadvantaged’.  

In Munktell Science Park in Eskilstuna the starting point for innovation is environment, culture and attitude. The people who rent space in the building are called “heroes”, not tenants. As well as providing space, the Science Park runs a range of different innovation initiatives including idea competitions, business training, and 24-hour races for new business ideas. The onsite incubator helps growth-oriented companies, for instance by plugging them in to business coaching, a Business Angel network and a new internationalisation forum.

The Science Park is based in a converted factory, which has been beautifully re-designed to reinforce the open innovation ethos and to serve the function of a welcoming, interdisciplinary place that creates interactions and networks. Around 30,000 citizens and visitors are welcomed each year. The features of the physical space itself contribute to the culture inside. Open innovation spaces lead to open participation, open experience, open deliver.

I take the view that ‘online relationships’ amplify offline relationships and trust is more easily established through face-to-face networking and proximity. Is the creation of a shared space in an innovation cluster critical to the success of Open Innovation? An interesting study would contrast pure-virtual, versus physical clusters and their Open Innovation outcomes.

Citizen Engagement

The Quadruple Helix focuses on citizen engagement in the innovation ecosystem. This is critically important in terms of the localism agenda, citizen empowerment, personal choice, infrastructure and broadband services improvement, and as the technological sophistication of citizens continues to increase.

Government often acts as a enabler of innovation clusters, supporting their creation and helping to establish best practice and governance. Agile government recognises regional variation and at the same time the need for centralised shared services. The role of government in successful innovation clusters is important, and maximising innovation potential is an interesting topic in terms of delivering maximum value for money for tax payers. The citizen is often the ‘expert user’, underpinning the importance of this dimension of the Quadruple Helix.

CliQBoost

CliQBoost is an interesting approach to mapping out the innovation ecosystem and using this as a guiding factor in the stimulation of further relationships. There is overlap potential with Social Network Analysis and innovation outcomes, possibly driven by developments such as the Tech City Map (the Tech City cluster in Shoreditch, East London)

Insight Strategy Stakeholder (ISS) maps are a tool to describe the key innovation related features of a city or region to allow comparative analysis. They provide a quick snapshot of other partners for each of the CLIQ members. The Insight section includes a profile, strengths and the unique selling point, sector specialisation and other defining characteristics. The Strategy section succinctly defines the main goals. The Stakeholder section maps the main stakeholder relationships in a diagrammatic representation, including stakeholders and other local actors who play a key role in innovation and entrepreneurship but with whom the partner has no (or only minimal) relationship. In essence, the stakeholder map aims to illustrate the local innovation ecosystem.

The ISS maps are a good tool to summarise key factors of the innovation systems in a readily understandable and comparable format, and to improve and drive forward connections between key stakeholders groups.

A comparison between CliQBoost analytics and the Tech City Map analytics (as one example) would provide interesting insight in best practices for profiling innovation cluster participants and potential. Maximisation of this potential (in terms of innovation and business success) would undoubtedly be of great interest to Business Angels and government ‘investors’.

In Closing

I see a lot of potential for the use of the VPEC-T systems thinking framework in the Quadruple Helix. Citizen Engagement is fascinating to explore through the lenses of Values and Trust.

Stay tuned for “VPEC-T meets the Quadruple Helix”…

I am a member of the Campaign for Science and Engineering (CaSE), which is the leading policy advocate for science and engineering in the UK.

In the January (2012) issue of CaSE News, CaSE published a ‘scorecard’ of Departmental CSA (Chief Scientific Advisor) ‘engagement’ in response to the House of Lords Science and Technology Committee inquiry into Chief Scientific Advisors and their roles within UK Government departments. Table 1 is a simplification.

DCMS is currently the only department with a CSA vacancy and most recently Professor John Perkins was appointed CSA at the Department for Transport and Professor Roderick Smith at the Department for Work and Pensions.

Science and engineering impacts the work of all government departments, and I endorse CaSE’s position, that:

independent scientific advice should be at the heart of government and that each department should have a Chief Scientific Advisor to deliver expert advice and oversee policymaking.

Table 1 – List of UK Government Department Chief Scientific Advisors.

Wales’ Chief Scientific Advisor is Professor John Harries and the newly appointed Chief Scientific Advisor for Scotland is Professor Muffy Calder (replacing Professor Anne Glover at the end of 2011).

The Campaign for Science and Engineering (CaSE) works to ensure that science and engineering are high on the political agenda and that through the implementation of appropriate evidence-based policies and adequate funding the UK has world-leading research and education, skilled and responsible scientists and engineers, and successful innovative business.

www.sciencecampaign.org.uk

The theme of Deloitte’s 2012 annual Tech Trends report examines:

those topics that have the most potential to impact businesses over the next 18 to 24 months. This year’s theme, Elevate IT for Digital Business, examines the broad impacts of five technology forces that have influenced our reports over the past several years – analytics, mobility, social, cloud and cyber security.

Tech Trends 2012 Overview Video

An introduction to the Tech Trends 2012 report, and an interesting mention of the concept of Post-digital Enterprise.

2012 Tech Trends Visualisation

The report categorises trends as Enablers (Big Data, Geospatial Visualisation, Digital Identities, Measured Innovation, Outside in Architecture) and Disruptors (Social Business, Gamification, Enterprise Mobility Unleashed, User Empowerment, Hyper-hybrid Cloud).

[mindmap source, Steve Nimmons]

High-level Analysis

Atos Cloud Orchestration

Summary

A very well produced and interesting report. Social Network Analysis, Pattern Based Strategy and Open Innovation deserved specific mention as does Zero Email as a consequence of Social Business. I am somewhat surprised that video (as a trend) is not specifically included.

I love the idea of Post Digital Enterprise, which sparks an idea for “Design Patterns for the Post Digital Enterprise.”

Patterns becoming Anti Patterns and Anti Patterns becoming Patterns. An illustration using the ‘history of cycles’:

1817 to 1819: the draisine or velocipede

Positives: basic concept established

Negatives: no pedals

Note: Foundational Pattern Established.

1860 Bone Shakers

Positives: Reduced weight, sleeker, more elegant designs, facilitated mass production.

Negatives: Rigid frame and iron banded wheels. Uncomfortable.

Note: Foundational Pattern extended – inclusion of pedals on front wheel

1870’s The Penny Farthing

Positives: Fast, lighter frame (small rear wheel)

Negatives: Dangerous – easy to get thrown over the front wheel, with catastrophic consequences

Notes: A seemingly illogical design variation, but with speed and weight benefits. By modern standards this would undoubtedly be considered an Anti Pattern. Velocipede and Bone Shaker considered Anti Patterns in this design

1886 Coventry Rotary Quadracycle

Positives: Stability, balance, room for two

Negatives: elaborate construction, size

Notes: Arguably a useful derivation of an Anti Pattern (the Penny Farthing)

1880’s and 1890’s – The Safety Bicycle 

Positives: suspension, pneumatic tyres, enabler of female emancipation. Improved comfort and speed, as the drive was transferred to the non-steering rear wheel and allowed for smoother pedalling.

Negatives: Comparably few.

Notes: Gone the Penny Farthing Anti Pattern, return of many features of velocipede and bone shaker patterns.

The basic design pattern of the Safety Bicycle has changed little in over a century.

The Technological Context

Complex Information Systems do not tend towards a ‘Safety Bicycle’ design. There are too many factors such as shifting dynamics, business models, technological advances and trends. Many Patterns become Anti Patterns (although it is not inevitable). In all of the examples above, the wheel (Pattern) is a constant. Patterns become Anti Patterns when a better solution is found, possibly due to new capabilities or insight. Patterns can falsely become Anti Patterns, as illustrated by the design deviation towards the Penny Farthing. The Penny Farthing Anti Pattern was soon recognised, due to serious safety concerns.

In legacy transformation, it is impossible to convert the Penny Farthing into a mountain bike. Penny Farthing conversion Anti Patterns are however regularly attempted in application and infrastructure modernisation.

The Hype Cycle

To continue the metaphor, the Hype Cycle fuels Pattern / Anti Pattern misclassification. The ‘latest and greatest’ might well be the enduring Pattern (the Safety Bicycle). In some cases however it could also be a Penny Farthing, nice to look at, but with few practical or enduring qualities. 

Self-knowledge and self-deception

As George W. Bush would have undoubtedly remarked, take care not to ‘misunderestimate’ (sic) self-knowledge and self-deception.

Brian Clough

I wouldn’t say I was the best manager, but I was in the top one.

Osbert Lancaster

For self-revelation, whether it be a Tudor villa on the by-pass or a bomb-proof chalet at Berchtsgarden, there’s no place like home.

Tom Stoppard

The kind of person who embarks on an endless leap-frog down to the great moral issues. I put a position, rebut it, refute it, refute the rebuttal and rebut the refutation.

Oscar Wilde

I don’t at all like knowing what people say of me behind my back. It makes me far too conceited.

Oscar Levant

Underneath this flabby exterior is an enormous lack of character.

A. E. Housman

The photograph is not quite true to my own notion of my gentleness and sweetness of nature, but neither perhaps is my external appearance.

Charles-Maurice de Talleyrand

He has a profound contempt for human nature. Of course, he is much given to introspection.

Observing Trust

Twitter is a fascinating addition to modern life (technically and sociologically). It has (largely) overcome massive scalability challenges and is an exemplar in coping with ‘unprecedented’ growth. Twitter uses Big Data technologies, and massive scale social platforms are redefining design thinking.

Twitter has verified celebrity accounts for some time. The ‘white tick in a blue circle’ on the profile page of the Dalai Lama certifies his account as genuine. Followers (in the virtual sense) accept this certification.

Verified by Twitter – the Dalai Lama…

Why is this trust dynamic interesting?

• Typical end-users know little of ‘the Twitter organisation’,
• The identity certification process is not well known,
• We are ‘suspicious’ of accounts of public figures which are ‘not verified’, even though they may be genuine,
• We know ‘Twitter isn’t perfect’ (the fail whale),
• And yet – certification is accepted without challenge.

The Twitter ‘fail whale’

Is this problematic?

Twitter needs to get account verification right. A verified account that turns out to be an impersonation is embarrassing. The recent case of Wendi Murdoch illustrates why. Should this happen on any scale (or with any frequency) reputational damage would result, along with loss of trust in the verified account status. Celebrities (or their agents) would undoubtedly be quick to highlight impersonation, as they too must protect reputation. This creates an interesting identity assurance ‘feed back loop’. Correlation of identities reinforces trust – e.g. where a celebrity links to a Twitter account from an established (and trusted) website.

Twitter’s public “verified” program beta has been phased out, so for ‘the Tweeting masses’ there is no account verification mechanism. This is proportionate, but greatly restricts the potential of identity assurance. In a sense, Twitter is acting as an Identity Provider for high-profile people:

• There is a Registration service,
• an Enrolment Service,
• an Identity Verification Service,
• and a mechanism to demonstrate proof of identity to others.

Participation in the trust framework is acceptance by the ‘followers’ of the ‘white tick, blue circle ’, as a Twitter ‘kite-marked’ identity.

Why is this interesting?

Thinking about this as an abstract pattern leads to a number of predictions/hypotheses:

1. Social Network providers will eventually offer fully-featured identity services to end-users
2. Trust frameworks will be created where the assured identity is ‘transferable’ (identity federation)
3. Identity as a Service and transactional services around identity management will become popular
4. As consumerisation is driving ‘bring your own technology’, we will reach a point of “Bring your own Identity” where the trust framework extends into the enterprise.

Twitter users trust Twitter to professionally deliver the account verification process. Users (by and large) do not really consider how that process works.

Will this herald a ‘new norm’ where social network identities are used in the corporate realm, in the guise of ‘Bring your own Identity’?

A feudalism Anti Pattern?

This Anti Pattern attracts controversy. It is potentially incendiary, and presents itself during analysis of business architecture, particularly organisational design and efficiency.

Anti Pattern Name [Headcount Justifying the Manager.]

Type: [Managerial, Organisational.]

Problem: [Organisational Structure may have changed and departmental headcount reduced, yet managerial roles have not been re-factored or re-assigned. Another manifestation is the creation or parallel evolution of similar functions. The former is typically because of a Status Quo Bias ‘perpetuating’ management structures which are no longer required or efficient (a ‘yeah, whatever’ approach to change). The latter is commonly due to poor governance and mergers.]

Context: [Business Architecture.]

Forces: [Status Quo Bias (a major culprit), ‘conflict’ avoidance, failure to recognise inefficiencies, unwillingness to merge teams and to slim down management structures, failure to recognise significant commonality in business functions.]

Resulting Context: [Overly complex management structures, inefficiency, under-utilised managers, risking additional Managerial Anti Patterns such as micromanagement.]

Solution(s): [Merging functions and redeployment, reducing organisational complexity, particularly where there are duplicate or near-duplicate functions. Setting performance based management targets to arrest any ‘pastoral care only’ management behaviours.]

This post uses the Anti Pattern template (with some modifications) from c2.com as its structural basis.

Systems Thinking – going beyond the technology

Wikipedia defines Systems thinking  as:

the process of understanding how things influence one another within a whole. In nature, systems thinking examples include ecosystems in which various elements such as air, water, movement, plants, and animals work together to survive or perish. In organizations, systems consist of people, structures, and processes that work together to make an organization healthy or unhealthy.

In an Enterprise sense, Information Systems design, implementation, evolution and decommissioning must be based on an holistic problem solving and decision making approach. As the Information System comprises People, Process and Technology, an appropriate Systems Thinking approach (in this context) will consider aspects such as:

Table 1 – Aspects of Systems Thinking in Enterprise Information Systems (abridged)

System inputs include strategy and legal constraints. Business events and enterprise information must feature in the Systems Thinking approach. External forces such as geopolitics, market trends and macro-economics (potentially) affect the system.

Systems Thinking methods for Information Systems include VPEC-T, which helps structure thinking using ‘5 dimensions’ (Values, Policy, Events, Content and Trust). Enterprise Architecture frameworks, e.g. TOGAF and Zachman also structure Systems Thinking for Information Systems. Views across Business Architecture, Application Architecture, Data Architecture and Technology Architecture serve some of the aspects described in Table 1 (although these tend to focus much less on ‘soft aspects’, such as values and trust).

Systems Thinking is therefore:

the appropriate consideration of all aspects of a system, relevant to understanding and achieving its desired behaviour.

Thinking that ignores or trivialises critical system components (or their interactions) will always be problematic (the traditional folly of focusing only on the Information Technology).

Simplify in haste, repent at everyone’s displeasure!