A partner institution recently requested student enrollment assistance via our consortium agreement. Our team recognized this as a simple scenario where we have specific guidelines to support learners. Therefore, they assessed the request, categorized it, and responded to it following the typical process we have in place (known knowns). During the same week, the team collaborated with a community college to initiate a new partnership. In this case, the team assessed the opportunity, analyzed the programs that could be aligned, and responded with a proposal. In other words, the situation was slightly more complicated than the first one, requiring expert analysis of the curricula and providing the best opportunity for the partnership (known unknowns).
While these examples are common in higher education, we also encounter more challenging situations in our daily operations. Like many organizations, higher education institutions are recognized as complex systems operating within various frameworks. As a result, we face a range of intricate scenarios. For instance, when a university collaborates with a company to design a new curriculum, it often navigates such complexities. Initially, the concept of the program may be unclear, prompting stakeholders to probe, evaluate, and respond to the company’s needs. Once the curriculum is developed, feedback from both learners and the company may necessitate revisions to the content, revealing unknown unknowns.
Finally, there is a chaotic scenario characterized by crisis, where leaders must take decisive action, evaluate the situation, and adjust their responses as necessary. The four contexts of the Cynefin Framework can guide leaders in their decision-making processes. While this framework is valuable, leaders in today’s complex environment need to develop new skills and mental models. Many of us were trained with strategies that thrived during the Industrial Revolution, where success meant maximizing efficiency and focusing on economies of scale. Power, information, and responsibility were concentrated among a select few leaders at the top of the hierarchy. However, the current digital revolution calls for a systematic approach that embraces variability rather than attempting to predict, control, or eliminate it.
Complex adaptive systems (CAS), as in the case of a university, have key aspects: (1) they have self-organizing agents, (2) the agents are interdependent of each other and the environment, (3) the systems within CAS learn from open feedback, (4) they follow simple rules, (5) conduct trial and error experiments, (6) coevolve with the environment, and (6) the self-organizing agents can develop new complex structures recognized as emergence. Therefore, to be successful in a complex system, leaders should increase the diversity of thought, be transparent with information, use simple rules, push power and responsibility down, increase the frequency of interaction, and create a networked team. This will allow speed of execution, which in this new era is more important than perfect execution. Once a decision is made, feedback is provided, new learning occurs, and new responses can be given.
If we live in a complex environment, we work in complex systems, and change is happening rapidly, what tools can we use to develop these new skills and mental models?
I have been leveraging three key concepts and their associated tools to enhance my work within complex systems. First, Sunnie Giles’ Six Competencies for Radical Innovation provides an excellent framework to create a strong foundation for successful teams and leaders. Dr. Giles suggests that we need to start with self-management. In other words, we need to be aware of our fears and how we respond to them. Such fears can trigger mental and physical reactions that diminish our ability to remain open, flexible, and adaptable. Additionally, fostering a sense of safety is essential. This can be done by being transparent, facilitating, coaching, and distributing control and authority to the right teams. Third, we need to create differentiation by fostering diversity of thoughts, introducing randomness, allowing members to self-organize, and setting up permeable yet strong boundaries. Moreover, people and ideas need to be connected. Strong connections among team members create agility in the team. Leaders also need to facilitate learning and support their teams in the trial-and-error process. Last, organizations must live at the edge of chaos to find emergence, positive complexity, and coevolution.
Secondly, I complement this framework with foresight and futures thinking practices. Scanning for signals of change has become instinctive for me as I continuously seek out stories, experiences, and images that offer insights into potential futures. For instance, riding the Waymo car in Phoenix was an experience that prompted me to question the future of the transportation industry, and reading about living computers made from human neurons raised compelling ethical questions about a future where these organoids gain consciousness. At first glance, these two narratives seem unrelated, but when examined alongside emerging trends across the economy, society, and politics, they can illuminate possible futures ten years or more ahead. The objective is not to predict the future but to envision possibilities, identify emergent patterns, and explore novel ideas to stimulate radical innovation.
Design thinking emerges as the third concept I find particularly valuable. As we delve into addressing contemporary challenges, our exploration of innovative ideas from both within and beyond higher education enables us to envision new, human-centric solutions creatively. In this process, we strive to understand the needs of today’s and tomorrow’s learners. We embrace a wide range of ideas, from those that may seem unconventional now to those we employed a decade ago. We aim to create and test these solutions while recognizing that perfection is not a prerequisite. We embrace the possibility of failure, learning from the feedback loops we encounter, reflecting on our experiences, and continuously evolving.
To close, I would like to go back to the beginning. We know how to solve simple and complicated problems. How are we preparing our teams to deal with complex issues? How do you currently navigate complexity within your role?
Explore more insights from Dr. Lawrence on effective leadership in digital learning through the Institute for Emerging Leadership in Online Learning (IELOL). Register for this year’s program to learn from her and connect with a network of innovative leaders!
Maricel Lawrence, EdD, is the Innovation Catalyst at Purdue Global, where she plays a key role in shaping the future of education and work. She earned her Doctor of Education in Leadership & Innovation from Arizona State University, her master’s in adult education and training from Colorado State University, and her bachelor’s degree in Spanish from Indiana University. Maricel’s career in higher education began at Purdue University, where she contributed to the development and launch of online courses and programs. Before joining Purdue Global, she served as the executive director of UMOnline at the University of Montana.
