Managing and Engineering in Complex Situations

When faced with intractable problems that are surrounded by high degrees of uncertainty and transience, it is imperative that the nature of the problem be understood. Too frequently, solutions are proposed in the same disciplinary construct in which the problem was framed, and the intractability encountered. Situations Theory is the meta-theoretical study of the conditions that surround a problem. It is not a specific discipline aimed at developing understanding higher levels of understanding of specific phenomena from a well-formulated perspective. Rather it is focused at understanding how such perspectives contribute to dealing with problems encountered in complex situations. The practicality of Situations Theory lies in being able to better judge the effectiveness that an approach will have given a specific set of conditions that might surround a problems, or as a basis on which robust methods and tools can be developed that are congruent with the nature of the problem that is to be addressed.

The uncertainty inherently associated with complexity challenges decision-making processes, indicating a need for a construct for decision making in complex situations. A review of the literature on systems, complexity, and paradigms indicates that such a construct must be internally consistent with well-defined philosophical foundations and further that systems and complexity (as used in complex situations) are not necessarily internally consistent with traditional philosophical foundations. Therefore, a decision making construct for complex situations requires research into different foundations. This research addresses these gaps, deriving axiological and methodological components based on a set of principles consistent with the ontology and epistemology of Sousa-Poza and Correa-Martinez (Pragmatic idealism as the basis for understanding complex domains: the trinity and SOSE. In: 2005 IEEE international conference on systems, man and cybernetics vol 3, pp 2744–2750, 2005). The combination of these four philosophical components – a pragmatic ontology, rational epistemology, idealist axiology and situational methodology – is asserted to establish a foundational perspective for complexity and systems.

This paper presents a theoretical construct for assessing wicked problems as they occur in complex situations and defining problem context. The construct of understanding presents a way for assessing a problem as perceived by an observer. It is suggested that the paradigm of sole full analysis in a complex situation is not feasible when these two conditions are present and pervasive. It is suggested that a synoptic perspective (high level perspective) may be more useful to establish not only what is perceived as reducible and transient within a situation, but also to assess the individual that perceives the situation. To elaborate on the construct, fuzzy logic is suggested as a way to quantify the perception of irreducible and transient variables.

With so many terms available to define the same thing, it would seem nearly irresponsible to introduce yet another term [complex situation] that appears to describe a phenomenological state such as a system. However, complex situation infers both a broader meaning and imposes a differing perspective. Complex in this context is dependent on understanding and reality rather than observer and knowledge, and Situation imposes a gestalt that cannot be characterized within a singular perspective that relegates paradox to a hierarchically imposed primacy where the “squeaky wheel” gets the attention. This also infers that complex situation has no monotonic definition or each attempt at a definition by a singular perspective is by default incomplete. Therefore the perennial derivations for system: complex systems, system of systems, federation of systems, stochastic, chaotic, dynamic etc.… are no longer a sufficient descriptor for complex situation. Ergo system and its genealogy lack the constitution to define complex situations. To wit, this paper provides the premise for a situation and describes the conditions that make it complex sufficiently for syncretic study by discipline(s) in the proposed field of complex situations.

This concept paper introduces the notion of sustainable development (SD) as a wicked problem. The characteristics of a wicked problem are reviewed and briefly discussed as they apply to SD. Sustainability is marked by a high degree of stakeholder subjectivity. Its long history can invoke multiple concepts such as resource scarcity, conservationism, environmentalism, or a business model. Because of the different levels of complexity and extensive network of stakeholders, sustainable development makes for apt designation as a wicked problem. It is also proposed that wicked problems can be reduced to two basic elements: kinetic and subjective. Because of the complexity involved in tackling SD as a wicked problem, the usage of Systems of Systems (SoS) platforms are briefly described and deliberated.

The operational level of war for the U.S. military lies between two boundaries: tactics and strategy. Similarly, complexity lies between two boundaries: equilibrium and chaos. The symmetry is perhaps coincidental, but it highlights an important point, that is, both share common attributes. This paper explores those and describes the military as a complex organization confronting complex adversaries operating in complex environments. If we assume the character of war constantly changes, as many in the military claim, it follows that the character of future war must also change. What models and tools will enable operational level practitioners better understand this co-evolutionary dynamic? Complexity research offers a new perspective.

Complexity in the cognitive environment can have a significant impact on the success or failure of complex situations. The wicked problem lies inherently in the complexities of human and social dynamics that are intrinsic to so many complex situations especially likely to involve ambiguity and lack of clarity for decision making as well as uncertainty of situational understanding in a dynamic cognitive environment. Understanding the cognitive environment offers a heightened level of situational understanding imperative in a complex and dynamic situation where pattern recognition and problem solving are a challenge and the cost of mistakes is high. This paper offers strategies and examples for understanding and moving toward mastering the wicked problem of the cognitive environment.

Decision making in Engineering Management suffers from Mitroff’s Type III error; solving the wrong problem precisely, Mitroff (1998). Engineering Management requires a holistic interpretation of theory to provide for the diversity in decision making, often imposed by the pragmatic nature of the situation. As a multidisciplinary field Engineering Management challenges decision makers’ ability to explain phenomena within the aggregate of each individual disciplinary boundary. Whether the failure is from the intractable nature of the individual disciplines that make-up Engineering Management or through the efforts of integrating misaligned perspectives generated from each discipline, Engineering Management suffers from the ensuing uncertainty and complexity that challenge decision makers. It is assumed that there is sufficient overlap between the two disciplines to overcome any integration issues, however, the gaps are generally obscured rather than addressed by the overlap.

This aggregation in disciplines leaves gaps in terms of making coherent decisions; each discipline is immersed within its own lexicon and axioms and is either subsumed or obviated entirely by the dominant discipline. These gaps become particularly poignant in wicked problems and are the focus of this paper, within these gaps lie uncertainty, and with it emergent and dynamic properties that over time constantly change the nature for how the problem is framed. Mainstream decision process follows a substantive approach that relies on ergodic and monotone conditions for the most effective decision choices. The central theme for this chapter is derived from the premise that a substantive decision approach is less than effective in dynamic situations where emergence and randomness are prevalent and a process approach would prove more utility.

The general thesis for this chapter:

This chapter intends to show how complex situations are antithetical to a substantive decision process and offers an alternative process approach towards wicked problems. This paper explores the nature of the multidisciplinary problem set and the challenges it poses on current decision processes and discusses the implications of decision making for addressing wicked problems. Finally the paper introduces the concept of an interpretive process for dealing with complex situations, Reverse Decision Making (RDM), for making decisions in complex situations. The intent of this chapter is to support a decision process that obviates the inherent complexity found in emergent dynamic environments for which multi-disciplines are created to address.

The complexity that surrounds us is reflected in recent explorations of globalization (Croci Angelini, 2011), internationalization (Scott-Kennel and von Battenburg, 2012), investment capitalism (Stacey, 2010), information technology (Marler and Liang, 2012), engineering (Bosch-Rekveldt et al. 2011), the Occupy Wall Street movement (Davenport, 2011), Arab Spring (AlSayyad and Massoumi, 2012), and leadership to name a few. Maznevski (2011) in her article The Complexity Conundrum noted the short term focus of managers who were “simply unprepared to anticipate the impact of their decisions in a more complex world” (p. 3) and laments manager naivety in the still lingering economic crisis. Addressing leadership in this volume could help all leaders and managers deal more effectively with the complexity that seems to be increasing at every turn.

This paper presents three simultaneous aspects supporting the perspective that the complexity of individual, group, organization, social aspects comprising USJFCOM in the pursuit of “aspiring-to” transformation mission responsibilities is a wicked problem. The first part presents Rittel’s (Bedriftsokonomen 8:390–396, 1972) and Rittel and Webber’s (Policy Sci 4:155–169, 1973) ten characteristics of wicked problems as they relate to transformation aspiration. The second part describes why individual, group, organization, social aspects comprising United States Joint Forces Command (USJFCOM) meet Rittel’s (Bedriftsokonomen 8:390–396, 1972) and Rittel and Webber’s (Policy Sci 4:155–169, 1973) ten characteristics of wicked problems. The final part integrates thirteen of the sixteen situated emergence themes derived, through the transformative intentionality lens of Stacey et al. (Complexity and management: fad or radical challenge to systems thinking? Routledge, New York, 2000) and Stacey’s (Complex responsive processes in organizations: learning and knowledge creation. Routledge, New York, 2001) complex responsive processes of relating theory, from the standpoint of simultaneously enacted participant, practitioner, and researcher roles based on my: (1) personal participation in USJFCOM emergence 1998 to date (2007), (2) professional practitioner responsibilities as strategic development advisor and transformationalist in USJFCOM 2000 to date (2007), (3) dissertation research project of USJFCOM transformation mission responsibilities from 1999 to date (Welsh, Transformation changes everything: exploring organizational leadership challenges in an “aspiring-to” transformative environment. Doctoral dissertation, Regent University, Virginia Beach, 2007). The consequent core claim here is that coherence in understanding an “aspiring-to” transformation mission, an irreducibly wicked problem, requires consciously deprivileging the present dominant systems-based discourse, specifically in relation to leadership, diversity, complexity, and paradox, as unsuited to the intentional pursuit of transformative outcomes.

As the first decade of the new millennium demonstrated, the majority of the challenges and threats that America now faces are of a complex nature. There has been much academic thought regarding the nature of complex problems and that has produced many noteworthy attempts in both public and private sectors to develop methodologies for understanding and confronting complexity. Despite these efforts, global leaders still struggle to confront the complex challenges of the twenty-first Century: AIDS, cancer, obesity, climate change, over-population, crime, terror, poverty and an unstable and turbulent economy are just a few. This paper provides some practical ideas and methodology for approaching complex problems. While complex problems rarely have a solution, there are both good and bad approaches to solving them. Identifying optimal solution sets is critical to success.

This chapter explains a technique called constructed cartography that makes maps or diagrams of events that you might not initially consider appropriate for mapping, including various real or imagined manifestations of diseases and our successful and unsuccessful attempts to mitigate those manifestations. The goal is to reveal underlying patterns in messy data. Starting with data in a form where underlying patterns are elusive, a visual summary is constructed. Information is neither created nor destroyed, just transformed into a more useful form. Two fundamental ideas that allow these charts to be constructed – functional distances and multidimensional scaling – are reviewed. This chapter then describes in detail the data that are needed for constructed cartography. A simulation shows that a sample of 35 cases is sufficient to extract 90% of the pattern in a much larger population. Finally, this chapter reviews several diverse instances where the technique has worked well: administrative funding versus successful vaccinations, migrations, metastases, and symptoms of disease. Finally the potential of aligning our attempts to fight diseases as well as our knowledge of how the disease spreads with ways that the disease actually spreads is outlined. Such a test of congruence of efforts can occur at the individual or at population levels. Places where these constructed charts do not line up are places for closer inspection, consideration, effort or training.

We live in a world of increasing levels of uncertainty and ambiguity with fewer and fewer tools from ordinary management that are useful in addressing the challenges we all face. Most people live in a world of complexity where the way in which we choose to engage each other and to work is critical. This is the world of wicked problems. The diagram below illustrates this world—showing that the ways to live with the highest possibilities of success are at “The Edge of Chaos”—tche world where Authentic Leadership is the key to a more sustainable future.