Complexity of hi?rarchical systems

A paradigm shift - from hierarchy in positions to hierarchy in complexity

When we look at the way in which most organisations control the outcome of their strategies, we find a pyramid of hierarchy reflecting supervisory tasks. Management over operations, D-level over management and C-level over D-level. The higher in the hierarchy the more knowledgeable one is over the goings on below. Knowledge is centralised in people, and with that the choice on how to disseminate this knowledge. The latter is the main pitfall of organisations.

A short intro into process thinking. It’s the capability to distinguish activities in specified input, the throughput (sequence of actions) into a defined output. Every activity in itself is a process, in which results are passed on in sequence. LEGO. Through proces thinking the insights in tasks and activities is strengthened. Agreement on and alignement of activities enhances the quality thereof.?

When we change the perspective from the ‘who does what’ organigram-style of looking at an organisation towards the whole of actions that agents perform in activities of organisational and delivery processes we can imagine a reel of projections, like in a motion picture over a still showing hierarchical positions.

A system is an entity which can be defined for its materialisation constituting its form. A system is influenced by legal, socio-economical, ecological factors that influence it and its goals, such as relevance or evolution. A human is an example of a system. An organisation (of work) is also a system that with a clear and communicated strategy organises resources to deliver goods and services to achieve its goals.?

Access to information

The key to survival is not in numbers or in storytelling, but the ability to adapt your goals and actions to fit with influencing factors and the market, which provides resources and demands services and goods. When man is perceived as the whole of its actions, the main differentiator is not the level of show how or know how but its senses and agility. When mirrored on the system of an organisation, communication between the multiple agents is essential to align the actions constituting the activities in the organisational and delivery processes to fit with this change. This means access to information derived from observations and alignment to serve its goals is critical. The information comes from data placed in the proper context. This information together with the proper description of aligned activities and actions therein give an organisation the possibility to control the the number of resources required to fulfil the foreseeable flow of orders, for the defined output, the sequence of actions and the specified input allow for adequate management, based on the forecast of orders, the real time situation and the historic events.

The sub system: division of work over multiple agents

When we add a layer of complexity, we can see that different actions in activities can be performed by different agents based upon their skills and their availability in space and time. This requires the alignment of actions in the activity and the communication of the state of the action of the activity to the proper agent (feed forward), and the feedback of the action back to the activity. Subsystems are the organs in a body or agents contributing to the goal of an organisation in exchange for payment.

The super-system: the eclectic combination of activities by different systems in an overarching proces.

Adding yet another layer of complexity, the super-system or ecosystem, we can see that different activities within systems can be placed in a joint proces in the super-system. Similar to the sequence of actions in activities, activities themselves are placed in the sequence of an overarching proces. Similarly, the planning of activities and the communication of the state of the activity in the proces to the proper systems is required. Again, agreement and alignement enhances the quality. Seeing the dilemma between competition and collaboration, the communication tools aligning the systems/schemes is best organised as a decentralised utility.?

Levelling out the playing field between systems - concept of equality in agreements

Catering to privacy: placing the individual in control over its (transactional) data and relevant identities

‘Human centricity’ in data (spaces) is a false objective. For it is the relationship between systems (entities: legal entities and natural persons) that is key. The value exchange between these two in which the individual is either consumer of goods/services or provides know how and show how, places them only one end of the bargain. These exchanges are at the fundament of our society, which can be social, economical, ecological, etc. The main difference between the legal entity and the natural person is that the first is expected to be identifiable in a transparent way (public registration), and the latter has the right under GDPR and DGA to only be identifiable by the presentation of those personal data (credentials) that are (minimally) required to fulfil the (data processing) activity. In this regard the communication on specific activities of a specific transaction by specific systems (stakeholders) needs to limited to pre authorised personal data, regarding accounts or their related media. Implementing such a cleanroom only accessing and reusing personal data with regards to the proper data activity process caters to GDPR en DGA compliance.

Interested to learn more?

About taking ownership over your steering capacities, emerging value of collaboration and compliance with GDPR/DGA? Contact Ferdinand Burgersdijk at FRCB B.V. for personal coaching and mentoring, and or read up on levelling out the playing field on fairsfair .