Pioneering can’t be left to philosophers, ethicists, policy makers, futurists, strategists and innovators...

This series of postings discusses the difference between systems thinking and systemic action and is a primer on how a disciplined and pragmatic activation of breakthrough change is essential to address urgent societal innovations. Through the series, we will connect observations on “Applied Pioneering” to the context of responding to climate change, managing the energy transition, institutionalizing and governing AI and technology disruption, tempering global political polarity, predicting and responding to pandemics, optimizing economic globalization, managing cyber vulnerability, and balancing DEI requisites among other urgent challenges.?

Unfortunately, we are not wired to be systems thinkers. If this was the default decision-making agent, it would have hindered the survival of our species. When faced with natural threats, simple and rapid responses prevail. This evolutionary reality has been hard-wired into us and most animals. Amusingly, one exception is the sponge, but I digress. This is the essential nature of how our nervous-to-endocrine system collaboration works, the best-known example of which is our “fight-or-flight” response, though freezing (non-response) and fawning (pleasing) have been recent updates served by the same mechanisms. There is much research about the intricate mechanics and even modern dysfunction of this essential body system. It’s role in decision making is increasingly featured in leading-edge cognitive and behavioral science. Daniel Kahneman’s Thinking Fast and Slow, which earned him the Noble Prize in Economics, explored the farthest depths of its impact on our personal lives and society as a whole.

Summarized simply, though perhaps too simply, the brain’s decision making centers essentially either work reactively (fast) or with reasoning (slow), which is managed by two unique brain centers. The fast thinking piece is governed by the mid-brain, including the amygdala and hypothalamus which are activated without any initiative from the person.? These drive the emotional thinking of craving and aversions. Once triggered, they can and often do supersede the slow thinking agent, the frontal lobes, which function on intentional and deliberate thought.?

?

Daniel Goleman, the author of all the incredible EQ books that have pioneered vast improvements on intentional decision-making, refers to a part of this phenomenon as Amygdala Hijacking. In his observations, he states one important difference between us and other animals who have fight-or-flight responses is that we can think critically about the future. This is a blessing and a curse. The power of forethought is what puts us at the top of the food chain.? Unmanaged though, humans are prone to being provoked by constant future-casting which creates the same mental and emotional outcomes as real world stimulus. It is easy to see how this could run amok.

?

The moment we became a civilization, this important ancient wiring had to be replaced by thoughtful reflection at a higher order. In other words, trade-offs contrary to the tactics involved in the “parts” became essential and throughout history, this has been a meaningful part of what has propelled us through significant achievement. For simplicity, we’ll call these the sacrifice bats. Not surprisingly, the more complex our ambitions as a civilization have become, the more intricate the system thinking that is needed to serve the “whole”. If only metaphorical bunting could always be the answer.

?

Higher order thinking is often referred to as systems thinking. By some estimates, the percentage of people who are natural system thinkers is 3%. Although it’s probably an arguable statistic, or at least I want to believe it’s more prevalent. But even those who can learn to conjure it are all too often nurtured into fear of acting on it, which will be covered more in future postings.? It is commendable to see that organizations and institutions are teaching their people how to elevate purpose through systems thinking. Yet, it’s not surprising to see that the thinking often remains just that with attempts at action precluded by many factors.

?

As the title portends, pioneers of various sorts may be insufficient left with the responsibility of breakthrough transformation. Often by their own admission, they recognize the tendency towards living in the realm of theory, ideas and models. I can observe this without judgement as a person prone to this default - those who know me well will be nodding vigorously. Though don't mistake my views for invalidating these contributions. The importance of these ideological frameworks is monumental. Still, it’s easy to appreciate that progress will invariably be hindered by any lack of translation towards action.

From my constant and expansive experience as an innovation-focused leader, there can be a somewhat stark lack of translation from idea to action. Worse yet, I regularly see changes ensue blindly with little regard for end results or mechanisms for improvement. The trite edict after all recognizes that “change is hard”, though the saying perhaps under serves the true magnitude of its difficulty. Unsurprisingly, the moment that we take the ideas from paper into real life, there is a veritable “immune system” reaction protecting and preserving the status quo.? Why? Because all too often, the trusted anchors of the past are a composition of narrow reflections across subsets of excellence and not the elevated purpose of the whole. These remain essential as do the trusted advisors who built them and steward them everyday. Still, we must learn to acknowledge and overcome these narrowing tendencies.

?

Why does this tendency so often prevail? Human nature is instinctive. If we are somewhat hard-wired to react as summarized above, we may do less reasoning than we intend. The thinkers, i.e. pioneers, among us will do much better with the reasoning of the ideas though much worse with manifestation of outcomes. If the statistic is right, that’ll amount to 3% of the group. The doers who ultimately operate the world will naturally resist, predicating their protective reaction on often well-established principles and measures that have been indoctrinated as their north star. They will doubt connections being purported by the high-minded pioneers, often rightfully so and therefore not to be ignored. Experience has proven to me that this will often preclude the testing of most if not all systemic hypotheses. If the doers, especially those closest to the action, provide the lifeblood of manifesting real outcomes, we must learn to translate better!

?

This is where things get interesting. We live in a world constantly activating our emotional bodies. There is hardly room to supersede whatever first nature (reaction) we may have in our wiring or nurturing. I’ll be the guinea pig and admit that my cravings and my aversions often govern me, not with permission, nevertheless with great authority. The research shows that elevating your purpose, especially when collaborating across domains where your fluency may be low, takes discipline and rigorous execution methods along with the setting and constant cultivation of a new culture. ?

?

So what exactly is needed to become really good at what I’ll take the liberty of naming “Applied Pioneering”?? Institutions must first look closely at the roots of humanity and accept our predispositions as a species. Only then can we impose techniques to defeat our nature and learn from the successes that ensue. Done well, the collective "we" will accelerate our handling of even the most trying challenges. Every circumstance, puzzle and urgent transformation will be different as they call upon different instincts of individual and societal reactivity. Let's begin with the humility of recognizing the lack of absolutes and proceed with care.

Applied Pioneering requires the stitching of a myriad of inter-disciplinary knowledge and skills. As this article highlights, hacking our neurobiology is a key point of origin. Not far behind is behavioral science. I would warn though that even the most talented Harvard Business School (a convenient epitome and not an indictment) change expert will struggle relying on textbook leading practice. Why? Because Applied Pioneering requires in-depth understanding and synthesis of the relevant disciplines across subject matters including business, science, technology and analytics. And as the series will explore later, use of tools from the human-centered design toolbox, lean start-up techniques, and agile and continuous improvement methodologies among other relevant approaches has proven essential.

Continue reading the series for more insights on the tangible and first hand practices utilized to bridge systems thinking to systemic action across many of the business and societal innovation domains noted in the series description. To avoid any irony, the series will delve into detailed examples and first hand experiences. Guidance on activating your “inner sponge” may also be incidentally imparted.