Introduction
Given current events, looking into the future and figuring out what to do next has become difficult, overwhelming, and frustrating. There is so much we don’t know and so much we want to know before making certain strategic, and even operational decisions. As I visit with people about all of this, I am reminded of the words of former Secretary of the Defense, Donald Rumsfeld: “There are known knowns. These are things we known that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don’t know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don’t know we don’t know.”
Unpacking his comments is important. First, known knowns are things we are aware of and understand. Second, known unknowns are things we are aware of but do not understand. Third, known unknowns are things we may understand but are not aware of at this time period until they show up. Finally, unknown unknowns are things we are neither aware of nor understand. We can not see them, and we do not know they even exist.
When we fully grasp Rumsfeld’s comments, we may feel stuck and comforted by his insights. We feel stuck, because we grasp how blind we are as leaders and how little we understand. At the same time, we may feel comforted by the fact that we are not the first ones to experience this place, and that we now have a set of terms to explain the complexity before us.
When coaching people at this time period, I encourage them to engage in “whole-seeing” and “whole-thinking,” two terms defined by Marsha Sinetar Ph.D., pioneering educator, organizational psychologist, corporate advisor, and prolific author. For me, whole-seeing is to to be present to all that is happening around us and within us. It is not to judge current events or current feelings. Instead, it is to acknowledge them and to feel them.
Whole-thinking, on the other hand, is to recognize the strengths and limitations we have and to seek pathways to adapt to the knowables and unknowables, be that in our thinking, decision-making, and subsequent execution of those decisions. For what I have learned over time is that during certain situations, and as a result of engaging in whole-seeing and whole-thinking, we need to create a bridge plan more than a strategic plan.
What Is A Bridge Plan?
In a world where there are layers and layers of complexity, some of which are unnecessary, and nearly all of are uncontrollable, we struggle as leaders to make decisions. We want to get it “right” and the difficulty is that there are too many known and unknown variables. And thus we go into hyper-vigilance mode, thinking we can pay attention to every thing and every one. However, our awareness depends on the availability of our attention, which often in these situations is limited. In simple terms, we have too many inputs and not enough time or energy to process them. And as result of this limited capacity, we often choose a course of action that requires the smallest amount of effort or expenditure of energy with the hopes that it will create the greatest outcome with the least amount of work.
When I encounter situations of this nature where the knowns and unknowns are in a constant state of flux and the overall external market conditions are dynamic, I remind leaders that an extensively premeditated, carefully built, long strategic term plan designed to achieve a particular goal has a built in problem. This kind of strategic plan is not adaptable by nature. It is not prepared for unforeseen variables that will surface during its execution. So, rather than presenting a rigid set of instructions or tactics which has the potential to create organizational vulnerability, I recommend leaders and organizations create a bridge plan.
The purpose of a bridge plan is to span the turbulent times until more complete information can be gleaned about what is happening, or until the more dynamic variables become stable, i.e. known knowns. While a grand strategic plan would be fantastic, a bridge plan, in the interim, can generate local solutions and local short term wins, all resulting in local ownership, engagement, and confidence. The cumulation of all these local wins has the potential to generate overall corporate adaptability in the midst of complexity.
At the same time, when I think about those who have created successful bridge plans during challenging times, I am reminded of something that Jim Collins and Morten T. Hansen in their book, Great By Choice: Uncertainty, Chaos, and Luck - Why Some Thrive Despite Them All (HarperCollins, 2011). As they explained, “The ability to deal with a crisis situation is largely dependent on the structures that have been developed before the chaos arrives... it’s what you do before the storm comes that most determines how well you’ll do when the storm comes. Those who fail to plan and prepare for instability, disruption, and chaos in advance tend to suffer more when their environments shift from stability to turbulence.” In short, when we build a bridge plan, we are building a structure that creates the capacity to handle instability, disruption, or chaos as market environments shift back and forth from stability to turbulence.
To be continued on Tuesday.
No comments:
Post a Comment