Accompanying my son at two open days at Loughborough University and Lancaster University, respectively. Loughborough was seriously impressive, and he’s keen to study Geography with Sports Science there. He thinks he’d like to go to a campus-based university, but we’re still going to visit Sheffield University next week, where my wife and I met, and I studied Philosophy.
Taking my daughter to various football trials.
Experimenting with three (paid-for) workshops for WAO to help people and organisations get ‘unstuck’. Details here.
Watching England scrape through in the EUROs in an extremely unconvincing way against Slovakia.
Next week is going to be interesting. There’s the results of the elections in France, and then the UK General Election (in which I’ve already voted by post). We should find out about the JFF/IRC work this week, and then I should hear about the two jobs I’m currently being interviewed for next week. Our collaborator, Anne, starts a new job mid-month, and so it’s potentially all change…
Image taken by me at Loughborough University on Friday
Snowflake representation of the VSM created by Stephen Brewis, shared with me in a presentation
Earlier this week, I had an enlightening discussion with Stephen (‘Steve’) Brewis, a systems thinker who knew Stafford Beer. I’d been introduced to Steve (who only lives 12 miles away from me!) by Pauline Roberts, my OU tutor, and fellow north-easterner.
Below are the key points and concepts we covered relating to the VSM and more!
Markov Blanket: A concept in probabilistic graphical models that encapsulates the set of variables shielding a subset of variables from the rest of the network.
Causal Reasoning: Modelling causal relationships to predict and influence outcomes effectively.
Free Energy Principle: Biological systems maintain their states by minimising the difference between predicted and actual sensory inputs, a principle applicable to organisational systems for reducing uncertainty and adapting effectively.
Adaptation and Recursion: Helps organisations adapt to their environments through recursive structures, with each level representing a viable system that operates independently while being part of a larger system.
Resource Bargain: Negotiation of resources between different parts of the system (System 3 and System 1) to maintain balance and functionality.
Causal Planning vs. Feedback Models:
Causal Planning: Creating plans based on anticipated outcomes.
Feedback Models: Using feedback to adjust plans dynamically, promoting learning and adaptation rather than adhering to static plans.
Snowflake representation:
Unlike the traditional VSM diagram, this allows representation beyond two levels of recursion, allowing a more comprehensive visualisation that grows outward from the centre. (Note: I’m going to try and use this in upcoming MSc work)
Play as a Variety Amplifier:
Engaging with data in a relaxed, creative manner facilitates innovative problem-solving and adaptation. Mandatory play can stifle creativity, highlighting the need for voluntary and spontaneous engagement.
Paul D. MacLean divided the brain into three parts (reptilian, limbic, and neocortex), which was used by Stafford Beer to model different functional parts of an organisation.
Plays a vital role in maintaining homeostasis through complex communication networks. In VSM, it metaphorically represents the interconnectedness and communication pathways necessary for system viability.
The snowflake model’s many touchpoints allow for multi-faceted perspectives and complex interactions, enhancing adaptability and resilience.
Hologram and Predictive Models:
Using holograms with reference and object beams relates to creating comprehensive predictive models that handle surprise and adapt accordingly. (Note: I didn’t fully understand what Steve was talking about here, so will ask next time we meet)
One of the most common issues in organisational management is the absence of an effective System 2 (The Open University, 2020). This component, as described in the Viable System Model (VSM), is crucial for creating and maintaining the framework within which the primary activities happen. Without an effective System 2, organisations often face inefficiency and disruption to their operations.
The primary function of System 2 is to coordinate and stabilise operations (see diagram). This involves creating a framework to guide the activities of the organisation. Unlike a top-down, hierarchically-imposed framework, which often fails due to a lack of understanding at higher levels, an effective System 2 emerges from ongoing conversations between management and sub-management levels. A collaborative approach ensures that the framework is practical and grounded in the realities of the organisation’s operations.
Coordination problems arise from a lack of common standards or the way language is used within an organisation (Hoverstadt, 2020). There are plenty of examples of this, such as NASA’s Mars probe incident, which failed due to a mix-up between metric and imperial measurements. While this was a hugely expensive, embarrassing, and very public failure, there are daily problems around coordination and communication within organisations that could be solved, or at least mitigated, via a standardised framework.
System 2 also helps balance the need for common standards with the need for flexibility. Organisations need to find a balance between how rigid their support functions are and the adaptability of their operational activities. Maintaining this balance is essential for ensuring coordination without stifling innovation and responsiveness.
It’s worth remembering that the VSM is a conceptual model rather than a prescriptive methodology. As such, it is both useful for diagnosis and design — and then compare real-world situations with the ideal model, identifying weaknesses and mismatches.
To illustrate this, and to continue the example from previous posts, let’s consider a software development organisation. The lead developer manages the development team, while the product manager oversees client interactions and timelines. Each level addresses its specific challenges, which ensures the organisation functions cohesively. This recursive pattern simplifies management processes and enhances overall effectiveness.
So, effective System 2 management involves several key activities:
Establishing common standards and frameworks for coordination.
Facilitating ongoing conversations between different management levels to maintain a practical and adaptable framework.
Ensuring that internal activities and external environmental factors are synchronised to prevent oscillations and disruptions.
Preventing sub-management from optimising their activities at the expense of the organisation’s overall functioning.
In software development, lead developer developers focus on code quality and technical coherence, while the product manager ensures that client requirements and deadlines are met. Coordination between these roles is essential to avoid scenarios where technical excellence leads to missed deadlines, or rapid delivery results in poor-quality code. System 2 must ensure that all parts of the organisation work together harmoniously, even if this seems counterintuitive.
Essential components of System 2 in a software development company include:
Agreed frameworks for coding standards and project management methodologies.
Defined roles and responsibilities, including clear communication channels between developers, testers, and project managers.
Standards for code review processes, version control, and continuous integration.
In software development, these frameworks might include coding standards, project management methodologies, and communication protocols between developers and stakeholders.
In summary, System 2 of the VSM helps ensure effective coordination, maintain practical frameworks, and balance competing needs for standardisation and flexibility. The approach not only addresses internal complexities but also adapts to external environmental factors, promoting a resilient and responsive organisational structure.
References
Hoverstadt, P. (2020). ‘The Viable System Model’. In Reynolds, M. & Holwell, S. (eds.) (2020). Systems Approaches to Making Change: A Practical Guide. London: Springer, pp.89-138.
