Difference between revisions of "Cynefin"

From Pearl Language
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(+= Parallelism and contradiction are key.)
(+= {{quote|Enabling constraints guide what could be. Governing constraints direct what should not be.|@kjscotland}})
 
(11 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Oyster
|goal=approach the issue at hand appropriately and effectively
|stage=Sparkle
|background={{quote|100% predictability equals 0% innovation|Henrik Kniberg}}
{{quote|Enabling constraints guide what could be. Governing constraints direct what should not be.|@kjscotland}}
}}
See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynefin Wikipedia » Cynefin].
See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynefin Wikipedia » Cynefin].


Line 21: Line 27:
*Shift from fail safe env to safe to fail experiments; you can't explore what's possible in a complex system until you act in it.
*Shift from fail safe env to safe to fail experiments; you can't explore what's possible in a complex system until you act in it.
*Parallelism and contradiction are key.
*Parallelism and contradiction are key.
*Human systems are complex adaptive. we co-evolve with the patterns formed so recognize them early.
*Manage the evolutionary capability of the present ({{p|complex adaptive}}) rather than working idealistic future states ({{p|systems thinking}}).
*All symbiosis starts as a parasitic relationship.
==Sources==
*http://www.infoq.com/news/2012/09/snowden-agile-practice-theory
{{WebSourceListItem
|url=http://theitriskmanager.wordpress.com/2014/06/28/cynefin-as-a-filter-of-perception-part-one-of-n/
|site=The IT Risk Manager
|person=Chris Matts
|title=Cynefin as a filter of perception. – Part One of N
}}
{{WebSourceListItem
|url=http://www.infoq.com/articles/cynefin-introduction
|site=InfoQ
|person=Greg Brougham
|title=Cynefin 101 – An Introduction
}}
{{WebSourceListItem
|url=http://theitriskmanager.wordpress.com/2014/09/02/cynefin-and-the-business-analyst-product-owner/
|site=The IT Risk Manager
|person=Chris Matts
|title=Cynefin and the Business Analyst / Product Owner.
}}
{{WebSourceListItem
|url=http://lizkeogh.com/2013/07/21/estimating-complexity/
|site=Liz Keogh
|person=Liz Keogh
|title=Estimating Complexity
}}
{{WebSourceListItem
|url=http://iserialized.com/cynefin-framwork-in-agile-vs-waterfall/
|site=Iserialized
|person=Pål Eie
|title=Cynefin Framework in the context of agile vs. waterfall
}}
{{WebSourceListItem
|url=http://theitriskmanager.wordpress.com/2014/12/07/cynefin-and-estimates/
|site=The IT Risk Manager
|person=Chris Matts
|title=Cynefin and Estimates
}}
{{WebSourceListItem
|url=http://www.infoq.com/articles/cynefin-portofolio-management
|site=InfoQ
|person=Greg Brougham
|title=Cynefin 101 – Portfolio Management
}}

Latest revision as of 07:40, 3 September 2015

…{{{context}}}

✣  ✣  ✣

{{{wish full}}}

100% predictability equals 0% innovation
—Henrik Kniberg
Enabling constraints guide what could be. Governing constraints direct what should not be.
—@kjscotland

Therefore:

{{{therefore full}}}

✣  ✣  ✣



✣  ✣  ✣

See Wikipedia » Cynefin.

Goal: To find out which projects can and cannot be picked up with agile/lean.

  1. Ask participants to generate an exhaustive list of all current and upcoming projects; one project per note.
  2. Draw four quadrants and explain the basic categorization (only explain first terms in list below):
    1. lower right—Percievable, Predictable, Repeatable; Known; Lay people with instructions and procedures. Sense Categorize Respond; Best Practices
    2. upper right—Separated in time and space; Potentially knowable; Domain Expert or Subject Matter Expert, Craftspeople; Sense Analyze Respond; Good Practices
    3. upper left—Not repeatable, unique; Retrospectively coherent; Adventurers, Entrepreneurs; Experiment; Probe Sense Respond; Emergent Practices: Ever Evolving Pearl Language
    4. lower left—Not perceivable; Incoherent; Discovery; Act Sense Respond; Novel, Innovative Practices
    5. middle—Disorder
  3. Ask everyone to stick their projects in the most appropriate quadrant.
  4. Explain more detail about the quadrants: Simple, Complicated, Complex, Chaotic, Unordered.
    1. Simple—suited for straightforward project planning.
    2. Complicated—thorough analysis, planning, and moderate agile and lean approach; use good practices and pearl languages.
    3. Complex—suited for experiments with double- and triple-loop learning; read: agile, lean, cooking with principles, play with recipes; use pearl language when appropriate;
    4. Chaotic—suited for a flurry of short, intense experiments, followed by observation and educated guesses for new experiments.
    5. Unordered—leave alone; skip; drop.

Complexity

  • Shift from fail safe env to safe to fail experiments; you can't explore what's possible in a complex system until you act in it.
  • Parallelism and contradiction are key.
  • Human systems are complex adaptive. we co-evolve with the patterns formed so recognize them early.
  • Manage the evolutionary capability of the present (complex adaptive) rather than working idealistic future states (systems thinking).
  • All symbiosis starts as a parasitic relationship.

Sources

Retrieved from "http://pearllanguage.org/index.php?title=Cynefin&oldid=2551"