Fig 2 - uploaded by Erik Puik
Content may be subject to copyright.
The four contexts of the Cynefin framework. When in disorder, the actual context is not known • In the simple context, cause and effect relationships are clear, predictable, repeatable, and generally linear. The systems in this context are self-evident to every reasonable person. The decision model of the simple context is sense-categorise-respond. Good response in these situations would be to watch what is coming in, match it to previously determined categories and decide what to do. The simple context is the context of 'best practice'; • In the complicated context, there is a logical relation between cause and effect, but it is not self-evident and therefore requires expertise. An analytical method is needed to solve problems, or an expert could be called in. The decision model therefore is sense-analyse-respond. The complicated context is the context of 'good practice'; • A complex system is a system without causality. Cause and effect are only obvious in hindsight, with unpredictable emergent outcomes. The decision model is probe-sense-respond. Carrying out experiments is a key characteristic; a successful outcome is enhanced, a bad outcome is suppressed. Actions lead to a novel way of doing things. The complex context is the context of 'emergent practice'; • A chaotic system shows no relation between cause and effect. The goal should be to restore order. The decision model therefore is to act-sense-respond. Actions will be new and unconventional. This is the context of 'novel practice'; • Disorder is the space when it is not clear to which context a situation should be appointed.
Source publication
Knowledge is essential to the product designer. It contributes to a better understanding of the difficulties in a design. With the right knowledge, design errors can be recognised in the early stage of product design, and appropriate measures can be applied before these errors escalate and delay the project. The axiomatic complexity theory, part of...
Similar publications
The two types of failure to achieve design functional requirements (FRs) are: Type I, the design cannot hit the FR targets; Type II, it cannot hit them consistently. The causes are due to inter-dependence among the FRs in Type I; and due to build and usage variability of the design in Type II. In this paper, we develop a mathematical understanding...
Citations
... Dave Snowden defined a framework for Cynefin decision support based on which projects can be divided into four areas (see Figure 2). It is more appropriate to use a different approach to PM for each area (Kempermann, 2017;Puik & Ceglarek, 2015). ...
... Framework for Cynefin decision (Puik & Ceglarek, 2015;Kempermann, 2017) The first area is the so-called simple domain, in which a large number of changes is not expected, and in which there is not a large risk of uncertainty of the result and it is clearly possible to manage it by waterfall PM. The second area is a complicated domain, where small changes can be expected and the result is more uncertain than a simple domain. ...
... where no suitable management method is defined (Kempermann, 2017;Puik & Ceglarek, 2015). PM can be approached purely traditional -waterfall, agile PM or we can approach a combination of both approaches within one project, which is one of the latest trends in PM (McGrath & Kostalova, 2020 117 This approach appropriately combines traditional and agile PM according to the individual needs of each project. ...
In the current strong pressure of the competitive environment, companies are forced to monitor scientificand technical changes that could affect the business areas in which they operate. There is a dynamicincrease in innovation, which leads to higher demands on investment in research and development due toa more flexible response to change. The area of research and development is very important for fulfillingthe company's strategy and research and development is becoming increasingly important for maintainingcompetitiveness and in terms of sustainability. Changes in research and development are implemented inthe form of projects, which are specific to a high degree of uncertainty and risk, which limits thepossibilities of using traditional waterfall project management procedures. Research and developmentprojects take many forms depending on the nature of the research, the focus of the innovation and thefield of implementation. The article focuses on the specifics of research and development projects,assessment of the possibilities of using methods of waterfall and agile project management, or theircombinations and evaluation of how to manage the basic parameters of research and developmentprojects. Subsequently, in the form of a case study, it assesses the form of application of projectmanagement methods and tools to a specific research and development project. In general, the articleprovides recommendations for the management of research and development projects and the proposal ofappropriate procedures for unplanned activities in the project with the help of combinations of waterfallproject management and agile project management.
... This is not unique as there are situations where complexity is desirable [45]. However, complexity should be reduced by the acquisition of knowledge at the end of the show [46,47]. A few typical situations are described and analyzed from a perspective of complexity in Axiomatic Design. ...
Axiomatic Design and Complexity Theory are often applied to highly complex and technological systems that provide educators with many engineering examples and case studies. The use of Axiomatic Design is applicable outside of these areas. However, there are not many examples outside of these areas. As a result, students often have trouble understanding the breadth and impact of Axiomatic Design’s application to problem-solving. One large complex system that is often overlooked is that of the kitchen. In this chapter, we present different food-related preparation tasks that are inherently complex: cooking a turkey, baking an apple pie, reverse engineering a recipe, and designing ecologically minded food packaging while also discussing the impact of prepared food’s packaging approaches on the environment. The authors believe such examples demonstrate Axiomatic Design’s applicability in a new aspect that is approachable to a wide audience.
... While the designer is working on his design, the lack of regularities will be reduced as much as the knowledge of the designer permits. It works two ways, (i) a designer that has no knowledge of the design cannot be expected to deliver a well-structured design, and (ii) the irregularities in this ill-structured design will not be addressed (Puik and Ceglarek 2015). As a result, the design will not be regulated well and, at some point, it will show unexpected behavior. ...
In the previous chapter, the concept of information in design was introduced. It was shown how the Information AxiomAxiomInformation could be applied to increase the robustnessRobustness of processes. It was also shown that the axioms in Axiomatic Design (AD) should be addressed in a distinct order. In this chapter, four different kinds of complexity in AD are explained that can be applied for typical situations. Also, a way to visualize complexity in design is introduced; the “Functionality DiagramFunctionality diagram.” After studying this chapter, the reader should know the following: The reader will understand the particular but powerful definition complexity of in AD, which kinds of complexity in AD have been defined, and how they can be applied. The reader will also learn how to apply complexity in functionality diagramsFunctionality diagram, that offers a powerful way to visualize the design processDesignprocess as it evolves over time.
... Narratives are often used to explore the boundaries and place of a system in relation to the Cynefin framework [4]. A specific boundary to explore is between the Simple and Chaos domain, also referred to as a cliff [1], because it is seen as a catastrophic failure of a system. A security breach can push a simple system over this edge. ...
... And yet, in this part most of the security aspects of the product are determined [7]. Success or failure is tightly correlated with behavior and skills of the team members [1]. Improving on security is not only about using the right tooling -it is also about improving the skillset of the team and increasing the presence of Security related requirements in the design phase. ...
... In this phase the system is vulnerable to events that causes a catastrophic push from Simple into the Chaotic domain, e.g. by a security breach. Or to a more gradual counterclockwise movement [4], caused by degrading of components or loss of knowledge in the support and design team [1]. ...
In the relatively new domain of the Internet of Things (IoT), startups and small companies thrive in and stride in bringing new products to the market. Many of them experience problems and fail to profit from their IoT innovation. A lot of those problems are security related. In IoT development, security issues are often overlooked or underestimated.
... 102 Sin embargo, todavía se identifican problemáticas asociadas a estos principios tales como: los sesgos cognitivos 103,104 e inadecuada comunicación de las racionalidades de las partes interesadas para el diseño (95), limitando la colaboración; 104,105 se afecta así la calidad en la toma de decisiones durante el diseño y en consecuencia el éxito de proyectos de ADPO. 106 Asociado a la justificación de la racionalidad que conduce a la toma de decisiones de diseño, específicamente en el dominio de procesos organizacionales, no se han encontrado soluciones. En cambio, sí ha habido avances en el ámbito del desarrollo de software 107,111 y la gestión de arquitecturas empresariales, 112 esferas estas que están relacionadas con el análisis y diseño de los procesos. ...
Explicitar el diseño de los procesos de la organización posee gran importancia debido a que los procesos especifican el conocimiento de cómo la organización funciona. Por tal motivo, se impone la necesidad de crear capacidades para la detección oportuna, planificación y ejecución de proyectos de análisis y diseño de procesos orientados a la innovación, lo que es complejo de sistematizar, a causa de la dinámica de cambio a la que se ven sometidas las organizaciones. En la literatura científica se han sintetizado 10 principios que impactan en los componentes del sistema de trabajo para la innovación de procesos organizacionales. La investigación tiene como objetivo exponer los resultados de la revisión bibliográfica realizada sobre el grado de cumplimiento de los principios en las soluciones metodológicas y tecnológicas que se orientan a la innovación de procesos. A partir del estudio de 3633 referencias bibliográficas se comprueba que ninguna solución está en conformidad con la totalidad de los principios, evidenciando carencias que impactan en la eficacia, eficiencia y sostenibilidad del diseño de los procesos organizacionales. Palabras Clave: análisis y diseño de procesos organizacionales, principios, sistema de trabajo, revisión bibliográfica.
Explaining the design of organizational processes is a paramount issue because the processes specify the knowledge of how the organization works. For this reason, the need to create capacities for the timely detection, planning and execution of analysis projects and design of processes oriented to innovation is imposed, which is complex to systematize, due to the dynamics of change to which organizations are subjected to. In the scientific literature, 10 principles have been synthesized that impact on the components of the work system for the innovation of organizational processes. The research aims to expose the results of a literature review conducted to assess the compliance with such principles in methodological and technological solutions that are oriented to process innovation. From the study of 3633 bibliographical references it has been verified that no solution is in conformity with the totality of the principles, evidencing deficiencies that impact on the effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability of the design of the organizational processes.
... This is not unique as there are situations where complexity is desirable [45]. However, complexity should be reduced by the acquisition of knowledge at the end of the show [46,47]. A few typical situations are described and analyzed from a perspective of complexity in Axiomatic Design. ...
Axiomatic Design and Complexity theory are often applied to highly complex and technological systems which provide educators with many engineering examples and case studies. The use of Axiomatic Design is applicable outside of these areas. However, there are not many examples outside of these areas. As a result, students often have trouble understanding the breadth and impact of Axiomatic Design’s application to problem-solving. One large complex system that is often overlooked is that of the kitchen. In this paper, we present different food-related preparation tasks that are inherently complex: cooking a turkey, baking an apple pie, reverse-engineering a recipe, and designing ecologically-minded food packaging while also discussing the impact of prepared food’s packaging approaches on the environment. The authors believe such examples demonstrate Axiomatic Design’s applicability in a new aspect that is approachable to a wide audience.
... It is worth noting here that Cynefin [24][25] is also about sense-making in an interdisciplinary setting. Indeed, as the Welsh word Cynefin suggests, the emphasis is on multiple-belongings, i.e., multiple domains that mash-up to create the unwieldiness of modern complexity. ...
The blockchain revolution upholds the decentralizing ideal of “control nothing.” It is natural that such a pursuit would face issues of governance that demand reasonable control; control that is both operational as well as adaptive in nature. Eliminating middlemen and handing over controls to a trusted system of trustless agents does not thereby bestow trust across time. This is especially true when relentless change is the order of the day. Issues of governance rise up when blockchain systems (especially those that have embedded smart contracts) are forced to operate increasingly away from their original intent. Smart contracts need governance when beset with the problem of the unknown-unknowns. Guided by the axiomatic approach, this paper looks at the paradoxical issue of blockchain governance from a Complex Adaptive Systems (CAS) perspective that helps frame the fundamental problem of decentralization. The objective is to solve the Blockchain Governance Kernel Design. Real-life examples are used to illustrate the findings.
... E. g. for the scum methodology, this lack of rigidity is mainly caused by client involvement and lack of visibility over the project outside the iterative 'sprints'. To address rigidity in NPD, there are basically two ways to be applied [7]: (i) Organise the design, and all its elements, by the application of knowledge (as detailed understanding of the design is enabled by knowledge); (ii) Test preliminary designs as soon as possible to enforce appearance of errors and address them accordingly (letting physics speak). ...
... As long as iterative cycles are organised as 'safe-fail' experiments, the test will provide positive results; (i) if the test succeeds, it provides for a solution, but (ii) if the test does not succeed, it may provide essential knowledge of the design process. A solid knowledge base of the design and the chosen solutions is essential as the result of the design process never exceeds the state of knowledge of its designers [7]. ...
Agile, and iterative, development methods for new product development are gaining in popularity under product engineers; where it initially was just applied for software development, now larger adoption takes place for product development in general. The design rules of agile development are somewhat conflicting with the guidelines of Axiomatic Design. In this paper, it is investigated why this is the case, what can be done about it, and how can the strengths of agile development be combined with Axiomatic Design to optimise methods for product design. It is shown that the methods are indeed advising on different and conflicting strategies, however, by attenuating the agile design rules in the early stage of design, and doing the same for AD in the later stage of design, best of both worlds can be combined.
... It is worth noting here that Cynefin [24][25] is also about sense-making in an interdisciplinary setting. Indeed, as the Welsh word Cynefin suggests, the emphasis is on multiple-belongings, i.e., multiple domains that mash-up to create the unwieldiness of modern complexity. ...
The blockchain revolution upholds the decentralizing ideal of “control nothing.” It is natural that such a pursuit would face issues of governance that demand reasonable control; control that is both operational as well as adaptive in nature. Eliminating middlemen and handing over controls to a trusted system of trustless agents does not thereby bestow trust across time. This is especially true when relentless change is the order of the day. Issues of governance rise up when the blockchain systems (especially those that have embedded smart contracts) are forced to operate increasingly away from its original intent. Smart contracts need governance when beset with the problem of the unknown-unknowns. Guided by the axiomatic approach, this paper looks at the paradoxical issue of blockchain governance from a Complex Adaptive Systems (CAS) perspective that helps frame the fundamental problem of decentralization. The objective is to solve the Blockchain Governance Kernel Design. Real-life examples are used to illustrate the findings. Keywords: Blockchain; Stigmergy; Governance; Complex Adaptive System; Heterarchical Hierarchy; Unknown-Unknowns; Smart Contract
... This issue and its implications for project management has been discussed in detail in the context of agile practices (Larman & Basili, 2003;Pich, Loch, & Meyer, 2002).Over time or by occurrence of incidents, transitions between the domains can happen and an adaption of the work procedures becomes necessary (O'Connor & Lepmets, 2015;Snowden & Boone, 2007). The transitions between the domains are tighlty connected to the availabilty or absence of knowledge (Albert Albers, Ebel, et al., 2012;Puik & Ceglarek, 2015;Snowden & Boone, 2007). Additionally it can be assumed that in real projects all domains exist in parallel, which corresponds to Albers' first hypothesis, that all product development projects are unique (Albert Albers, 2010). ...
There can be no innovation without time and space for ideation and courage to endeavor new terrain. Approaching this terrain in a structured way whilst managing the risks linked to the uncertainty of the novel is a major advantage of agile process models such as Scrum. On the other hand, most companies in mechatronic product development organize their activities in Stage-Gate-Processes for good reasons. This paper thus aims at combining the benefits of traditional and agile process models. The core assumption is, that even in overall complex projects, only a certain amount of tasks really benefits from agile practices. In order to identify these project elements, a differentiated view on project complexity is necessary. This differentiation is then integrated into a tool for analyzing task entropy as a measure of unknowingness and thus potential for agile approaches. These agile approaches are considered to be timebound episodes of concentrated problem solving with restricted ressources. Thus, theories about human problem solving and multitasking serve as a fundament for the conceptualization of short-term agile workshops. By restricting the duration of these workshops to two to five days, the barrier of practicing agile methods in arbitrary process landscapes is significantly lowered. The question arising is how proven agile practices can be scaled to these small time scopes while retaining the valuable, structuring elements such as fixed sprints and regular meetings. On the fundament of ASD-Agile Systems Design, this paper presents guidelines for implementation of agile workshops on smaller time scopes based on three pillars: 1) using a structured agile process, 2) using methods and tools in an agile way and 3) providing an agile moderator. Subsequently, an exemplary implementation of the concept is shown. This paper thus contributes to actually creating innovation by describing a systematic way to generate results whilst containing risks under conditions of limited ressources.
