In a traditional setting, change is perceived to be top down.

So there are goals and structures, ways to achieve change.

And change is almost always looked at as where we are,

where do you want to go, how to bridge the gap?

Now, in contrast, in complex adaptive systems, it's more emergent.

It's the interplay of all these systems together.

And it does not have a clear structure, but

it's more emergent, it's more reactive, as well, in a way, to the environment,

and change is all about how to fit in to the new environment,

than using traditional ways of gap analysis where you want to be.

In a sense, it's idealized, to fit to the current context or scenario.

>> The only word I would change in what you just said is not reactive but

responsive.

>> Responsive.

>> And I think your points are very well taken that

the ability to deal with the unknown, the uncertainty.

As I think Daniela illustrated, well,

a lot of us pretend that it's just certain and we'll use our existing tools.

We'll throw our hierarchy at it.

We'll expect the answers to come from the top.

But in fact in emergent situations, and we've seen this in some of

the scenarios we've played for you in the other past weeks,

that the answers and solutions and ideas can come from anywhere in the system.

There are many valid perspectives in a system's perspective,

not just the one at the top.

So in these situations, we've got to find ways to structure our teams,

so that the organization is self-organizing,

that we're going to learn our way forward and no one knows.

There is in a sense no rock star, no star, no expert,

because things have changed too fast.

No one has the experience and

that ind of exploration and discovery into this complex

adaptive systems means that are we've got to get unstuck in new ways, I think.

>> Absolutely.

And listening to the conversation as I'm sure you are, too.

It's almost as if the whole is different from the sum of parts.

It's not just that.

There's so many variables interacting in so many ways.

So many conversations taking place right on the edge of, I don't know.

I don't know how it's going to be.

I don't know what technology's going to do.

I don't know what the new levels of skills would do.

I don't know what would happen if we looked at the product distribution in

a different way, if we looked at engaging people in a different way, if we looked at

creating staff meetings in a different way, if everybody has a chance,

if everybody had a voice, if you could start contributing immediately.

No matter where you are, how different is the perception of change then?

How different it becomes if it's happening at a massive organizational level.

And no one really is controlling the process.

There is a fundamental structure beneath, just like jazz.

We come into it a bit like jazz.

And Alan, you're going to talk about it, you promised.

Maybe further along in the module but yes, some principles that lead to so

many new outcomes.

But we're going to talk a lot more about that.

>> Before we go too much further into complex adaptive systems and

improvisation.

>> Right.

>> Let's talk about change and let's give them an illustration.

Let's have you look at this scenario that we have done for this module.

That shows a team dealing with some unknown issues and some change.

And then, we'll debrief on that is to how much bad is traditional or

maybe how much bad is complex.

Part 3 - Organizing Under Uncertainty

Creating a Team Culture of Continuous Learning

Conheça os instrutores