A632.8.3.RB_MaceRoyce
Create a reflection blog based on critically thinking about how the Cynefin Framework can benefit your decision-making. Consider the chart on page 7 of the HBR article "A Leader's Framework for Decision Making" and discuss decision-making in multiple contexts; include two specific examples of decisions in multiple contexts that you have made. Detail the considerations from the various contexts that influenced your decision. Critically assess the Cynefin Framework and describe 5 ways it can provide an improved context for decision making.
In critically thinking about the Cynefin Framework, we realize the usefulness that it can provide in a range of decision-making scenarios. What the Cynefin Framework does best is remind us that decisions can be approached more carefully and effectively based on their level of uncertainty. Cynefin helps categorize a decision-making scenario more thoroughly by helping the decision maker determine its level of uncertainty. The most important thing that we can remember and from learn from the Cynefin Framework is that even at the most simple level of the framework, there is never a level of absolutely zero uncertainty. Discussing decision-making in multiple contexts, it is safe to say that the only decisions that will normally not change from decision to decision are decisions defined by the "simple" category of the Cynefin Framework. These decision are likely be "certain" most of the time and uncomplicated with "best practices" as an easy solution. With that being said, the other three frames of the Cynefin 2 x 2 matrix leave much uncertainty where decision-making can become more complicated than we think.
Snowden (2010) explains that most decision makers initially fall into a less known category called "disorder". From this category, decision makers choose a category based on their level of uncertainty and desired course of action. This context of the Cynefin Framework is important as leaders must remember to not become too hasty. Disorder should not cause panic and should actually be welcomed as a first step as opposed to trying to quickly categorizing the level of "uncertainty" as it relates to the situation. The first example of decision-making in multiple contexts comes from a decision in which I decided to join the Air Force. In the emotional context, the decision was chaotic because I had a high school sweetheart who I did not want to leave. I had no previous experience with these emotions, so it was a chaotic time for me at that juncture in life. From a logical standpoint, the decision was a complicated one because while I knew that the benefits of military service were great, I didn't know much about military life or where I would ultimately end up. I listened to the "experts" for advice which came in the form of family and friends who encouraged me to make a more educated decision.
Another example happened when I decided to leave active duty. In reflecting on that decision, I now realize how different social contexts drove my decision. Looking back in hindsight, the biggest decision-making factor was my serious relationship with my now wife (then girlfriend). This scenario was much like the first example, but the context was much different. Knowing that a the opportunity for a solid career awaited the first scenario, my decision was a logical yet slightly complicated one. In the second example, the scenario was different from a logical and emotional context. I was now emotionally involved with someone and the logical choice to separate the military (vice joining it) was easier to make because I had already established my professional life. Contexts were similar in many aspects yet very different in the social context, which made the decisions made so drastically different.
Lastly, the five ways in which the Cynefin Framework can provide an improved context for decision-making come in the following forms: it's systematic (e.g. sense, categorize, respond), it's a simplified matrix (2 x 2 categorization model), it's flexible/dynamic (it can function as a sense-making model with sufficient levels of uncertainty can be determined more easily), it's all-encompassing (even when the decision cannot be placed into a specific category, a boundary in the middle called "disorder" can allow the user to realize their starting point), and finally, it's balanced (as needed, the frames can be carefully transitioned utilizing boundaries thus giving the decision maker options when scenarios change and/or were previously misinterpreted).
References
Snowden, D. (2010, July 11). The Cynefin Framework [Video file].
Retrieved from http://www.spring.org.uk/the1sttransport
In critically thinking about the Cynefin Framework, we realize the usefulness that it can provide in a range of decision-making scenarios. What the Cynefin Framework does best is remind us that decisions can be approached more carefully and effectively based on their level of uncertainty. Cynefin helps categorize a decision-making scenario more thoroughly by helping the decision maker determine its level of uncertainty. The most important thing that we can remember and from learn from the Cynefin Framework is that even at the most simple level of the framework, there is never a level of absolutely zero uncertainty. Discussing decision-making in multiple contexts, it is safe to say that the only decisions that will normally not change from decision to decision are decisions defined by the "simple" category of the Cynefin Framework. These decision are likely be "certain" most of the time and uncomplicated with "best practices" as an easy solution. With that being said, the other three frames of the Cynefin 2 x 2 matrix leave much uncertainty where decision-making can become more complicated than we think.
Snowden (2010) explains that most decision makers initially fall into a less known category called "disorder". From this category, decision makers choose a category based on their level of uncertainty and desired course of action. This context of the Cynefin Framework is important as leaders must remember to not become too hasty. Disorder should not cause panic and should actually be welcomed as a first step as opposed to trying to quickly categorizing the level of "uncertainty" as it relates to the situation. The first example of decision-making in multiple contexts comes from a decision in which I decided to join the Air Force. In the emotional context, the decision was chaotic because I had a high school sweetheart who I did not want to leave. I had no previous experience with these emotions, so it was a chaotic time for me at that juncture in life. From a logical standpoint, the decision was a complicated one because while I knew that the benefits of military service were great, I didn't know much about military life or where I would ultimately end up. I listened to the "experts" for advice which came in the form of family and friends who encouraged me to make a more educated decision.
Another example happened when I decided to leave active duty. In reflecting on that decision, I now realize how different social contexts drove my decision. Looking back in hindsight, the biggest decision-making factor was my serious relationship with my now wife (then girlfriend). This scenario was much like the first example, but the context was much different. Knowing that a the opportunity for a solid career awaited the first scenario, my decision was a logical yet slightly complicated one. In the second example, the scenario was different from a logical and emotional context. I was now emotionally involved with someone and the logical choice to separate the military (vice joining it) was easier to make because I had already established my professional life. Contexts were similar in many aspects yet very different in the social context, which made the decisions made so drastically different.
Lastly, the five ways in which the Cynefin Framework can provide an improved context for decision-making come in the following forms: it's systematic (e.g. sense, categorize, respond), it's a simplified matrix (2 x 2 categorization model), it's flexible/dynamic (it can function as a sense-making model with sufficient levels of uncertainty can be determined more easily), it's all-encompassing (even when the decision cannot be placed into a specific category, a boundary in the middle called "disorder" can allow the user to realize their starting point), and finally, it's balanced (as needed, the frames can be carefully transitioned utilizing boundaries thus giving the decision maker options when scenarios change and/or were previously misinterpreted).
References
Snowden, D. (2010, July 11). The Cynefin Framework [Video file].
Retrieved from http://www.spring.org.uk/the1sttransport
Comments
Post a Comment