An anthropologist learns early to resist the lure of the “now” as the only reality worth studying. Cultures carry their past within them. Patterns of thought, the metaphors that shape our stories, the values that determine what we ignore and what we celebrate. These change far more slowly than market conditions. The same is true in organisations. Beneath the fresh branding and the new strategic frameworks, much of the underlying thinking is amazingly persistent. What changes most is the language in which it is dressed.
This piece proposes that complexity thinking is not just a methodology. It’s a moral and epistemic stance. It begins with the unsettling truth that we are not neutral observers of a system, but implicated participants. It asks us to let go of managerial comfort, inherited roles, and stakeholder entitlements and to dwell in ambiguity as a source of real possibility.
Organisations, like molecules, can become locked into a particular configuration. Old routines. Entrenched identities. Layers of habit that make change feel uphill. Conventional thinking tells us to overcome these barriers, kick off another reform, realign the structure, or roll out a new “change management” strategy.
But what if the most interesting changes don’t start that way?
There is a great deal of talk these days about systems thinking. Whole libraries are dedicated to it, workshops branded in its name, consultants selling it as the next evolution in leadership or strategy. It is, at first glance, an attractive proposition. After all, who wouldn’t want to […]
The choice of dialogue is also a matter of strategy. In business that choice can add competitive advantage to enterprises willing to collaborate.
.ROADMENDER 