Complexity Stems From Interrelationships
Complex problems are composed of many and varied factors with many and varied interrelationships. Correspondingly, the solution-discovery process and the solution that emerges will be equally complex. Managing this complexity depends on the ability to map out these interrelationships and track their behavior as the source of the overall behavior of the problem and its solution.
The network of interactions of a complex system is a highly integrated fabric. Missing just one important thread can throw understanding of a complex problem entirely off-track. Leaving out just one important link in a complex solution can render it totally ineffective. Mapping and tracking interactions is not a fun job. It can be tedious but it must be done.
- Understanding the problem depends on awareness of all the behaviors that are going on. Missing anything about the problem means there will be gaps in understanding that will led to serious or even fatal gaps in the solution. Thus the need for a complete map of the interrelationships and their behaviors in the problem.
- Likewise, designing an effective solution-discovery process and attaining the result of an effective solution requires identifying all the needed behaviors in the solution-discovery process and its product. This too requires a complete map of all the needed interrelationships and their behaviors.
Complete and Accurate in Every Detail
Scrupulous documentation of interdependencies is crucial What’s important…
- Identifying all the interrelationships
- Connecting all the links
- Describing and representing them for tracking and analysis
As CSD project moves forward, understanding of interdependencies will evolve. Any changes must be thoroughly analyzed, coordinated with all who are involved, approved as the new and valid information, and distributed in a timely and authoritative manner, to avoid blunders with impacts from minor to fatal. That is a job of the Knowledge Management function of the CSD project, discussed in another branch of this site.
A Fatal Fault of Adversarial Power Politics
Because it fragments the problem, and because of its rigidity stemming from its combative attitude, adversarial power politics is incapable of the necessary completeness and accuracy in mapping interdependencies. Hence, it is incorrigibly incompetent for addressing complex contentious issues.
Think “Interfaces”
“Interface” is a formal synonym for interdependency. It seems cold and technical when the issue to be resolved is a soft, human activity system, but its advantage is lending itself to the necessary rigorous completeness and accuracy of representation that is called for.
Interface is the term used for what exists and happens at the boundary where two interdependent objects meet. Why limit the relationship to that between just two objects? Can’t three or more objects share the same relationship? The answer is “No.” For strictly logical reasons, two and only two objects can share a particular interface at a particular time. Think of a key in a lock. Only one key at a time can fit. “But, ” you may say, “can’t several people in conversation share the same interface among the group?” Strictly speaking, each party to the conversation has an interface with the air between them, not directly with the other parties. The person speaking has an interface between mouth and air. The listeners each have an interface between air and ears. That may seem like a nitpicking technicality, but it is really important. Because it is so, it is necessary to map and track ONLY the interfaces between each pair of objects in the map of interrelationships. That greatly simplifies the job and makes it possible to use a small suite of representation tools, including lists, drawings, flow charts, N-squared charts, and the like, to represent everything about the interdependencies.
Creating the Map of Interdependencies
Start with a top-down representation of the system in question (Problem System, Solution-Discovery Process, or Solution), at whatever stage the level of understanding has reached, and in whatever view is most appropriate. Usually this will be either the Form or Function view, and often both. Carry the representation down through the levels of the hierarchy in the description, as far as that goes. In developing this image of the system, rely on the product of Dis-aggregation/Re-aggregation.
In this initial mapping, interrelationships (interfaces) will be indicated as lines connecting the objects in the selected views.
Then, for each connecting line in the map, describe the interdependency. What does it look like, and what happens when the system is active? Then check for completeness and accuracy. Are all the necessary interdependencies there, and is their representation accurate?
Static or Dynamic?
An interface can be static; that is, it does not change under system operation. A static description of the interface will be sufficient, such as a list of its properties or a picture of its configuration.
An interface can be dynamic. Something happens there in time as the system operates. That kind of interface will usually have some static features necessary for the hookup, but will also need dynamic representations of the activity to support analysis of the overall dynamics of the system. The overall dynamics of the system is represented by the simultaneous sum of activity at the interfaces within the system and with the world around it.
“Tracking Interdependencies” Means ?
One meaning refers to tracking the dynamic behavior of the whole system as determined by the sum-total dynamics af all the individual interdependencies, working as an integrated suite. This requires functional descriptions or models of the interdependency behaviors that can serve as components of an overall functional description or model of the entire system. Building this image of the system is generally a technical task for the project core team, in close consultation with the various concerned stakeholders regarding accurate description of situations and desired outcomes.
The other meaning is tracking the history and status of the configuration of all the interdependencies as understanding accumulates and designs evolve. That is essentially a bookkeeping job conducted under the aegis of Knowledge Management, as already mentioned above under “Complete and Accurate…” The purpose is to have everybody on the same page working with an up-to-date and accurate description of the system.
Form, Fit and Function
The general mantra for describing each particular interaction is “Form, Fit and Function” at the interface where the interaction takes place. For physical systems the meaning of Form, Fit and Function is pretty obvious. Do the shapes of the interfacing items match up. Are the dimensions the same, and are all the functions needed at the interface accommodated? Imagine a key that fits a lock. For soft systems, often human-activity systems, the descriptors at the interface are more abstract. The interactions often involve information, services or goods. Questions might include who is responsible on either side of the interface, what is the required form, content and quality of whatever passes through the interface, and how is the connection made?
Representations
Many of the representations introduced in the branch on “Focused Representations” are useful for mapping and tracking interrelationships. The Form and Function views are generally a good place to start. These can be expressed in either Flow chart or N-Squared form. The Flow Chart is good for visualizing the architecture of the system and the various flow paths which carry out the functions. The N-Squared chart is good for recording a complete and rigorous description of all the many interactions, and it is useful for analyzing the system to identify important sub-structures of the system such as tightly interdependent subsystems, feedback loops and such.
For dynamic hard systems such as regional transportation or a system to protect urban shoreline areas against sea level rise, interfaces may be represented by mathematical functions or models. These will be formulated so they become components in an overall system behavior model. For soft human activity systems, interfaces may be represented by operational protocols and, at a larger scale, operational scenarios.
A Powerful Toll for Consensus-Building
The maps of interdependencies for a particular problem, solution-discovery process or solution will be powerful tools for driving the process toward consensus. The act of participation in building these maps will confront each participant with the narrowness of viewpoint they each bring to the endeavor. They will find that others see the situation very differently in terms of concerns, goals, and solution concepts. If committed to moving collaboratively toward a single unified conclusion, they will realize that all viewpoints coming in are equally valid and worthy of respect. They will realize that each participant brings a piece of reality, and that achieving success based on a workable approximation of total reality demands an objectively critical examination of every contribution.