From Control to Coexistence: A New Survival Framework for Complex Work Environments

The Hierarchy of Controls has long been the standard model for managing hazards in the workplace. Its step-by-step approach—elimination, substitution, engineering controls, and administrative measures—works well in environments where risks are well-defined and predictable. This is the realm of Work as Imagined, where the focus is on simple or complicated domains with known hazards and clear solutions.

However, in many industries—especially those operating in high-risk, dynamic environments—this idealized version of work doesn't hold up. The reality of Work as Done involves fluidity, variability, and complexity, where risks emerge unpredictably and can’t always be controlled. In these situations, the limitations of the Hierarchy of Controls become evident, and a new approach is needed to ensure not just safety, but survival.

Enter the Continuum of Coexistence, a concept that embraces the complexity of modern work environments and prioritizes survival over control. This model is designed to help organizations navigate uncertainty and build the resilience needed to withstand and recover from the unexpected challenges inherent in complex systems.

The Limits of Control in Complex Environments

The Hierarchy of Controls is an effective tool in static environments where risks are predictable and manageable. In these cases, hazards can be eliminated or neutralized through well-established control measures, ensuring a safe environment for workers. This model works best when the hazards are known, and their behavior is predictable.

However, in complex environments, where the operational context is constantly shifting, this approach quickly falls short. Complex systems are characterized by interdependencies, emergent risks, and non-linear dynamics, making it difficult—if not impossible—to fully control or eliminate hazards. In these environments, trying to impose control can lead to overconfidence and a false sense of security, as it fails to account for the unpredictable and adaptive nature of the system.

Instead of relying solely on control measures, we must adopt a strategy that allows us to coexist with risk—adapting to changes as they arise and building resilience to survive the unexpected. This is where the Continuum of Coexistence comes into play.

Introducing the Continuum of Coexistence

The Continuum of Coexistence offers a dynamic, adaptive approach to managing risk in complex operational environments. Rather than focusing on eliminating or controlling hazards, the continuum emphasizes awareness (both contextual and situational), adaptability, collaboration, sense-making, and resilience. These elements work together to help organizations coexist with uncertainty, ensuring that they are prepared to survive whatever challenges arise.

Unlike the linear, step-by-step approach of the Hierarchy of Controls, the Continuum of Coexistence is fluid and ongoing—there is no clear beginning or end. It recognizes that risks in complex systems are emergent and constantly changing, requiring a continuous process of adaptation and response.

Here’s how the key elements of the continuum work together to create a survival-focused strategy:

1. Awareness

At the foundation of the Continuum of Coexistence is awareness, which consists of both contextual awareness and situational awareness. Together, these provide a comprehensive understanding of the environment and the dynamic risks within it.

Contextual Awareness

Contextual awareness involves understanding the broader environmental, social, and operational context in which work occurs. This requires recognizing the complexity, interdependencies, and human variability that shape the operational landscape. To aid in this, the Cynefin framework is a valuable tool for evaluating context and facilitating contextual awareness. By categorizing environments into simple, complicated, complex, and chaotic domains, Cynefin helps organizations identify the nature of their situation and adapt their strategies accordingly. This broader understanding allows teams to anticipate emergent risks before they fully manifest.

Situational Awareness

Building on contextual awareness, situational awareness focuses on the immediate conditions within the operational environment. It involves continuously scanning for real-time changes, recognizing patterns, and identifying new risks as they emerge. While situational awareness provides a snapshot of the present, it is informed and enhanced by the broader understanding gained through contextual awareness.

Together, these forms of awareness ensure that organizations are not just reactive but proactively attuned to both the overarching environment and the specifics of the current situation, allowing for more informed, adaptive responses to risks.

2. Adaptability

In complex environments, adaptability is essential. Unlike static systems, where hazards can be controlled or eliminated, complex systems require flexibility. The ability to pivot and adjust strategies in response to changing conditions is critical for survival.

Adaptability allows teams to respond to emergent risks without being locked into rigid control measures. Instead of trying to eliminate every hazard, the focus shifts to managing how individuals and organizations respond to changing risks and recover when things go wrong.

3. Collaboration

Surviving in complex environments requires collaboration. No single person or system can anticipate or manage all the risks inherent in these settings. By leveraging the collective knowledge, experience, and perspectives of the team, organizations can develop more effective responses to complex challenges.

Collaboration also fosters distributed decision-making. Instead of relying on top-down control, teams can work together to make sense of the situation and develop strategies for coexisting with the uncertainty of the environment.

4. Sense-making

Sense-making is the process of interpreting and understanding the evolving reality in ways that inform action. In complex environments, this is crucial—patterns, anomalies, and ambiguities are common, and making sense of them helps teams anticipate risks and adapt accordingly.

This is not just about reactive decision-making; it’s about proactively interpreting data, recognizing emergent trends, and making informed choices that allow for better survival strategies. Shared sense-making ensures that the team is working from a common understanding of the environment and is aligned in its actions.

5. Resilience

At the top of the Continuum of Coexistence is resilience—the ability to withstand, recover, and learn from adversity. In complex environments, failure is inevitable at times. Resilience ensures that when disruptions occur, teams can bounce back, adapt, and continue operating effectively.

Resilience in this context is about more than just recovering from failure; it’s about building the capacity to endure challenges over the long term. This is the ultimate goal of the continuum—creating an organizational culture that doesn’t just survive one-off events but is continuously prepared for the unknown.

Survival as the Prerequisite to Safety

A key tenet of this approach is the understanding that survival precedes safety. You can’t ensure safety in a complex environment where survival is uncertain. Safety is often viewed as a static condition—a moment when risks are controlled, and harm is prevented. But in complex environments, safety is subjective and fleeting; it’s only through the continuous process of surviving—adapting to and withstanding risks—that safety can be assured.

In short, survival is the ongoing process of enduring and withstanding hazards. It’s about developing the resilience and adaptability to coexist with uncertainty. Only by ensuring survival can organizations hope to achieve safety in the long run.

The Relationship Between Control and Coexistence

The Hierarchy of Controls and the Continuum of Coexistence are not mutually exclusive but rather complementary. In environments where risks are known and predictable, the Hierarchy of Controls remains an effective framework for managing hazards. But in complex systems, where emergent risks and unpredictable challenges are the norm, the Continuum of Coexistence is essential for survival.

Just as safety and survival are interdependent, so too are these two models. The Hierarchy of Controls provides a solid foundation for managing known hazards, while the Continuum of Coexistence equips organizations to navigate the complexity and uncertainty that can’t be fully controlled.

Conclusion: Thriving Through Coexistence

The Continuum of Coexistence represents a new way of thinking about survival in high-risk, complex environments. It acknowledges the limitations of control and emphasizes the importance of contextual awareness, adaptability, collaboration, and resilience in navigating the unpredictable. By integrating this approach with the more traditional Hierarchy of Controls, organizations can ensure both survival and safety in even the most challenging operational contexts.

Ultimately, the goal is not to eliminate risk but to learn to coexist with it. Survival strategies that focus on resilience, flexibility, and awareness will equip organizations to endure, adapt, and thrive in the face of complexity—ensuring that safety is more than just a fleeting state, but a continuous process grounded in the reality of coexistence with risk.