Sure Mike, the questions others have been raising are part of what led me to the gaps I found, and those questions don't loose relevance. Maybe the way to point out one gap in our thinking is with a question. What are the limits of growth for systems with no external constraints?
Phil Henshaw ¸¸¸¸.·´ ¯ `·.¸¸¸¸ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 680 Ft. Washington Ave NY NY 10040 tel: 212-795-4844 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] explorations: www.synapse9.com > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Agar > Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 6:24 PM > To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Real Time Organizational Modeling > > > Well, I dunno what to say here. There's about a century's worth of > work on organizational research and social research methodology > that's relevant here, and what I think you're describing as > part and > parcel of your approach--i.e. multiple data streams, moving > pictures, ethical issues, externalities, and the like--have > been part > and parcel of complexity approaches to the organization for a good > while. > > Mike Agar > www.ethknoworks.com > > > > On Jan 23, 2007, at 5:12 AM, Phil Henshaw wrote: > > > Since, using some of my tools, this is a realistic way of > probing the > > behavioral structures of real fully formed complex systems, I think > > like > > John that having more data streams than less is where to > start. The > > idea is the eliminate the use of diverse statistics to make separate > > snapshots of complex relationships, and to make moving pictures > > instead, > > that you can then find emerging behavioral structures in. > We've long > > had the computer power and the statisticians haven't > thought of the > > idea > > yet. There are lots and lots of meaty issues to deal with, > including > > privacy and security of information when exposing what are rather > > intimate behavioral patterns sometimes. > > > > Usually the problem with time series study with this intent is that > > there is only one well defined measure available over a reasonable > > period and there's a lot of labor involved in exploring what it's > > shapes > > correspond to. But those are basically limitations on effort. > > > > Of course both 'internalities' and 'externalities' are > relevant, and > > some math can help you see which shapes in the data are echoes of > > others > > and which reflect the original local emergence of new behavioral > > structure. Yes all this would take an effort, and lots of times > > you'd > > run out of funding and have to cut the effort short of advancing the > > pure science of complexity... Never the less, one can > also shoot for > > that, and maybe get the funding sometimes. > > > > > > Phil Henshaw ¸¸¸¸.·´ ¯ `·.¸¸¸¸ > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > 680 Ft. Washington Ave > > NY NY 10040 > > tel: 212-795-4844 > > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > explorations: www.synapse9.com > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > >> Behalf Of Michael Agar > >> Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 7:08 PM > >> To: [email protected] > >> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Real Time Organizational Modeling > >> > >> > >> Yep, that's pretty much what Steve Guerin and I did for the > >> California courts a year or so ago, though the variables aren't so > >> "hidden" after some fieldwork and therefore you don't have > to attend > >> to "all the variables you can conceivably acquire" but rather the > >> ones the organization has taught you are significant. > >> > >> Mike Agar > >> www.ethknoworks.com > >> > >> > >>>>> "Phil Henshaw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 01/22/07 4:04 PM >>> > >> Sometimes progress in solving intractable modeling > problems only puts > >> off reckoning with the more fundamental aspects. The > following is a > >> draft post for my environmental design forum that seems directly > >> relevant. > >> > >> To be realistic, there is a technique that can get you > half way there > >> easily, but you won't like it. It's to use the > organization itself > >> as it's own model, complete with all it's hidden variables and > >> inventiveness, that no substitute model maker could ever imagine > >> putting in. Then once the system itself is running (like... as > >> always) you start monitoring all the variables you can conceivably > >> acquire, and then watch them to learn what the 'model' is doing. > >> > >> The key is to have your monitoring system software flag > the dynamic > >> indicators of emergent whole system behavior. Then when you find > >> something happening you go see what's doing it. Lots of > >> things would > >> be as expected, but lots of them would also be a complete > >> revelation! I don't think anyone before has monitored > the dynamics > >> of living systems and flagged the major inflection points to see > >> where the internal feedbacks are switching. > >> > >> Phil > >> > >>> I think John's on the right trail with his opening and closing > >>> comments about "communication, which could start with notions of > >>> "tagging" and agent communication languages but then > would have to > >>> dive into the literature on discourse in the workplace. In > >> the many > >>> projects I've been involved with over the last year or so, the > >>> problem he describes is the normal situation and difficult to > >> figure > >>> out how to resolve. > >>> > >>> Maybe thinking of the problem in terms of the whole > organization is > >>> in the way here. > >>> > >>> The problem with the whole organization is that there are a > >> variety > >>> of mental models distributed within and linked to it, to some > >> extent > >>> constrained by shared task demands, to some extent still variable > >>> within task depending on the variety of biographies brought in by > >>> individual participants. Then another problem--the tasks > >> themselves > >>> change in response to changes in the organizational environment, > >> and > >>> the changes impact differentially on various organizational units > >>> with different rhythms. A third problem--Making the model is an > >>> example of Arthurs self referential logical hole for > economics-- > >>> Making the model changes the organization that it is a model of. > >>> > >>> The more the organization resembles the Complex Organization > >>> celebrated in the literature, the more difficult these problems > >> will > >>> be. Maybe the notion of a model of THE organization harks back to > >> the > >>> old hierarchical command and control steady state etc > model that so > >>> many try to change, except of course in government and the > >> university > >>> (: So models yes, but of issues that can be reduced and > clarified, > >>> probably not of an actual entire organization. > >>> > >>> All of this leaves John's original problem unsolved. It will > >> involve > >>> communication, but also issues of interests, power, distrust, > >>> prejudice, and others that also need to be addressed. > >>> > >>> Like he said, a WedTech discussion wouldn't be such a bad idea. > >>> > >>> > >>> Mike Agar > >>> www.ethknoworks.com > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Jan 21, 2007, at 8:41 PM, John Hellier wrote: > >>> > >>>> I am interested in this because of a clear > >>>> problem my group has in communicating. > >>>> This is manifested in an incredible lack of > >>>> understanding of what everyone else is doing, > >>>> even within a small sub-group. > >>>> > >>>> I work in an office of ~100 scientists and > >>>> engineers. The composition of the group is > >>>> broad in functionality and would make an > >>>> interesting test case for trying to capture > >>>> the dynamics of a larger group of scientists > >>>> and engineers. > >>>> > >>>> The project is informal and not quite funded. > >>>> So it is more a pursuit on the side for me. > >>>> But I have been thinking about it for some > >>>> time while working at a variety of organizations, > >>>> all having the same problem. > >>>> > >>>> It may be naive of me but I was thinking of > >>>> approaching this from the top-down with very high > >>>> level actors that evolve over time as the > >>>> model grows. The butterfly effect you speak of > >>>> may not come into play since my initial > >>>> parameters are very general. Initially, the model > >>>> would describe communication channels between actors > >> without getting > >>>> to specific about how to handle what is being communicated. Over > >>>> time the types of actions would be fleshed out for each line of > >>>> communication and allowed to change over time. Not sure if this > >>>> makes sense or not. > >>>> > >>>> Going forward I like to be able to create tools > >>>> that capture every action that people do. For > >>>> example, email should not be a stand alone > >>>> application. As a person is creating an email, > >>>> the content of the email should be linking to > >>>> a central repository of organizational knowledge. > >>>> Perhaps email as a tool is wrong for communicating > >>>> in an organization. It just happens to be what > >>>> we have and relatively expedient. A number of > >>>> the applications I have written there replace communication > >>>> channels that used to use email. For example, weekly > status reports > >>>> or work orders. Both of which were email activities but are > >>>> now formal apps with database backends. These > >>>> kinds of apps could be the start of tracking > >>>> activities. > >>>> > >>>> By capturing all the actions of an organization, > >>>> you could start to encode it. But you would need > >>>> a host of new tools for how people communicate. > >>>> > >>>> A WedTech meeting would be cool. > >>>> > >>>> John Hellier > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> --- Owen Densmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> On Jan 20, 2007, at 5:58 PM, John Hellier wrote: > >>>>>> Is anyone working on Real Time Organizational > >>>>> Modeling where the > >>>>>> model continually evolves based on changes in the > >>>>> organization. All > >>>>>> members of the organization contribute to the > >>>>> changes even down to > >>>>>> the creation of an email, how the email contents > >>>>> affect the > >>>>>> organization and how the recipients respond to the > >>>>> email. > >>>>> > >>>>> Well, this sounds almost like TranSims in its completeness and > >>>>> depth! Doug might have a suggestion how to approach something > >>>>> quite this detailed and ambitious. Sounds like LOTS of > >>>>> fun too! > >>>>> > >>>>> One problem in this approach is that it is > >>>>> susceptive to the > >>>>> Butterfly effect .. extreme dependency on initial conditions. > >>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butterfly_effect > >>>>> This is not a huge problem, but does mean that > >>>>> parameter scans, > >>>>> design of experiments, and the like are needed to > >>>>> make sure your > >>>>> predictions are stable enough for your purpose. > >>>>> Possibly computing a > >>>>> Lyapunov exponent would be a useful tool, but I > >>>>> confess to never > >>>>> doing so with my models, blush! > >>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyapunov_exponent > >>>>> > >>>>>> What I am looking for is the encoding of an > >>>>> organization such that > >>>>>> as someone creates an email, an observer can watch > >>>>> this happening > >>>>>> in the model and see the effect. Maybe the email > >>>>> has little or no > >>>>>> impact or maybe it has a growing ripple effect. > >>>>> > >>>>> I like the word "encoding" here. We've generally > >>>>> built behavior via > >>>>> algorithms, with a certain amount of stochasticity, > >>>>> but have not, in > >>>>> my mind, been quite formal enough. > >>>>> > >>>>> Carl: do you think policy modeling, and category > >>>>> theory in general, > >>>>> could handle encoding an organization? > >>>>> > >>>>>> This model should have a view of the entire > >>>>> organization including > >>>>>> tracking all actions performed. I realize that > >>>>> trying to capture > >>>>>> everything is a bit daunting but if possible it > >>>>> could yield > >>>>>> incredible insight into how organizations work. > >>>>> > >>>>> I'm curious: what is prompting this? Is it a > >>>>> possible project you > >>>>> may be working on? I ask because that might let you > >>>>> do *some* > >>>>> narrowing. > >>>>> > >>>>>> I generally feel that most decisions made in > >>>>> organizations are made > >>>>>> with such limited information that it is amazing > >>>>> that most > >>>>>> organizations don't fail. Or is that they are a > >>>>> lot less brittle > >>>>>> than one might imagine. > >>>>> > >>>>> No doubt about that! > >>>>> > >>>>> That said, one successful narrowing I know of is > >>>>> Steve's > >>>>> visualization of the pharmaceutical industry. > >>>>> Rather than look at > >>>>> the entire organization, the model looked at > >>>>> projects and their life > >>>>> cycle. Its a very interesting viz and maybe you > >>>>> could drop by the > >>>>> office for a show & tell. > >>>>> > >>>>> A second stunt Steve pulled off was actually a > >> multi-organizational > >>>>> simulation of the entire British criminal justice > >>>>> system, including > >>>>> the police, courts and more. Not sure if this would > apply in your > >>>>> case. > >>>>> > >>>>>> I know that there is quite a bit of work done in > >>>>> more bit size > >>>>>> pieces. I'm mainly interested in the much larger > >>>>> task of taking a > >>>>>> company of 40K and tracking every action and > >>>>> interaction. And then > >>>>>> by extension, actions connected outside of the > >>>>> organization. I > >>>>>> know, huge, maybe impossible. Is there a way to > >>>>> adapt social > >>>>>> networking concepts to an organization to help > >>>>> model it? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Any ideas? > >>>>> > >>>>> I'd propose a WedTech meeting .. the lunch chats we > >>>>> have at Redfish > >>>>> on Wednesdays. They often are pretty unformed and > >>>>> brown baggy. It'd > >>>>> give you a way to talk through the modeling effort, > >>>>> and get good > >>>>> feedback from at least those that have tried such a thing. > >>>>> > >>>>> I'd sure love to think about this a bit more. For example, one > >>>>> approach might be to accept the bit sized pieces, but then have > >>>>> them interact. That would make the problem more > >>>>> approachable by > >>>>> decomposition. > >>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks > >>>>>> > >>>>>> John Hellier > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -- Owen > >>>>> > >>>>> Owen Densmore http://backspaces.net > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> ============================================================ > >>>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > >>>>> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, > >>>>> archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> ============================================================ > >>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > >>>> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, > >>>> archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org > >>> > >>> > >>> ============================================================ > >>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > >>> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, > >>> archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org > >>> > >>> > >> > >> -- > >> Phil Henshaw ¸¸¸¸.·´ ¯ `·.¸¸¸¸ > >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > >> ~ > >> tel: 212-795-4844 > >> e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> explorations: www.synapse9.com > >> > >> ============================================================ > >> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > >> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, > >> archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org > >> > >> > >> ============================================================ > >> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > >> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, > >> archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org > >> > >> > > > > > > > > ============================================================ > > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, > > archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org > > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org > > ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
