I’m so interested in all three of the rabbit holes you want to continue exploring, but particularly the first two. Both are of course happening in many places already, but it’s certainly more of a slow, qualitative “vibe” change more easily seen in hindsight, I think.
Also (selfishly) it would be refreshing to see a *positive* take on the impact that outsiders have when many flock to one place at once.
yeah I think theres a lot to be written positively about nomad and expat culture. i think it just hits so many anger defaults via media that people cant help but frame it negatively: privelege, race, income inequality, colonialism stuff - its like a choose your own outrage story
but as you've seen, its obviously more nuanced than this
That bit about trying to implement changes with the old boys in the factory is great. I'm sure every ops analyst has scars from an encounter like that. So few of those efforts stick. And the chimeric process methodologies that sometimes spawn from them create so much overhead...
There can also be stag hunt game theoretic dynamics so different risk preferences and also winners / losers in a change. Even if it’s just something as silly as status
Great coverage Paul. A few initial thoughts (hopefully worth expanding on later)
1. As a paradox scholar for the past 9 years, it is always amazing what happens to me when I read the word "tensions". My eyes open, and my mind focuses, and lo and behold, a new field that uses the same lingo as my academic field. But, and this is the exciting part, as an independent field of study, reaching similar definitions, independently of existing bodies of literature.
2. I think two challenges arise from the "promise" of protocols.
First, there is an emotional element that seeks solutions to problems. We find it very hard not to box "protocols" as just another solution. Systems are hard to design, hard to control, and hard to master. Worse, they might be harder to "own" and to feel related to. I see a lot of calls for "ownership" from leaders and managers. But how do you own something that can't be inherently managed?
Second, the complexity of the jargon hinders better conversations and stories. I think I got lost somewhere around the middle of the post. I think this is a problem with systems theory, chaos theory, and in this case, protocols. If we want to explore the potential of such ideas, we need to find ways to communicate them more clearly. I recently read the classics by Elyahu Goldratt. My hunch is that his narrative teaching style is perhaps a better way to translate these ideas for general consumption.
I would start with the seminal paper from 2011 by Wendy Smith and Marianne Lewis "Toward A Theory of Paradox: A Dynamic Equilibrium Model of Organizing"
It sets a lot of the basic terminology and process. Since published it's gotten more popular and applied in more fields. Would be happy to discuss
Thanks for the lead! I'll take a look. Per your point about not treating protocols as a solution, I think it's just something you have to hammer home every time you bring it up. It's true that people love solutions. But some shit just doesn't go away... Plus, it's hard, but not impossible to make problem management appealing. Stewart Brand is making maintenance sexy. Protocols are a long way from being sexy, but they deserve to be regarded as such
Good stuff. I didn’t realize you were at SoP. I was there at Esmeralda last week running workshop on our internal process improvement initiative at Met. Did you end up going to nor cal?
Regarding the resistance to creative alt career paths, I think the power of life scripts cannot be underestimated. Once upon a time I did my senior thesis on the California dream and being a glutton for punishment expanded that into a book.
I love that you still so highly value intellectual challenge even in your post rat race world. In summary, it seems you really dig theory and ideas just like you did when you were in operations. Similar to that time, I wonder how Protocol Pill ideas are impacted by reality?
- one pro sports team I was at brought in a splashy, former superstar player as temporary CEO. he enacted a load of consultancy style changes which all reverted back as soon as his term was up
- Dominic Cummings has a Startup Party (name TBD) concept for the UK where a new party would gain power, enact a load of structural, protocol type change and then dissolve. might be worth a look.
Cummings gets a fair bit of discussion in the Boris Johnson book by Anthony Seldon (does books on every British Prime Minister after their term). he's got loads of interesting ideas and is clearly one of the great campaigners, but Seldon reckons that:
'Had Cummings focused on introducing the changes he identified, he might have become the most remarkable reformer in the hundred years since Richard Haldane, the intellectual, philosopher and politician fascinated, like Cummings, by German thought, by science, technology, intelligence and defence. Haldane helped found the London School of Economics and Imperial College, and pioneered a host of modernizations to government.'
but he didn't spend the time necessary to see through change (15 months in total), didn't make a clear plan for those inside the system and 'he didn’t understand the history. He failed, unlike them, to carry people with him.'
When I think about great leaders, you have to have a positive vision of the future that you sell internally and externally. You can't say 'this is bad' and expect people to come along with you.
He has another side to this story worth telling (they basically
Laughed at his ideas and Boris became obsessed with the news). I don’t know enough to trust but Cummins is very smart (and wisely out of politics for now lol)
I also studied Lean manufacturing for a little bit and really loved it as an idea. I find it hard to 'unsee' now. Afterwards, when I worked a little bit in corporate, I was really surprised at the scale of inefficiencies – I agree that corporate chaos is poorly understood. I assume that, at the margin, the people who implement and oversee systems already are competent and powerful in the context of the current protocol, and changing it causes them marginal hassle and decreases their personal leverage.
I also technically worked in 'Operations' but it was in a fully online company and seems much less fun than bricks and mortar operations.
Got that PDF on protocols, looking forward to checking it out.
By the way, have you read A Pattern Language by Christopher Alexander? It's about patterns moreso than protocols but really nice to dip into. I wouldn't necessarily recommend reading it A-Z but it's a good coffee table book or a good book to read the list of patterns (https://claytondorge.com/patterns-list) and see what appeals to you.
What was your favorite piece in getting protocol pilled? I loved the sop essay standards make the world
Unreasonable sufficiency
I’m so interested in all three of the rabbit holes you want to continue exploring, but particularly the first two. Both are of course happening in many places already, but it’s certainly more of a slow, qualitative “vibe” change more easily seen in hindsight, I think.
Also (selfishly) it would be refreshing to see a *positive* take on the impact that outsiders have when many flock to one place at once.
yeah I think theres a lot to be written positively about nomad and expat culture. i think it just hits so many anger defaults via media that people cant help but frame it negatively: privelege, race, income inequality, colonialism stuff - its like a choose your own outrage story
but as you've seen, its obviously more nuanced than this
That bit about trying to implement changes with the old boys in the factory is great. I'm sure every ops analyst has scars from an encounter like that. So few of those efforts stick. And the chimeric process methodologies that sometimes spawn from them create so much overhead...
Yup. Sometimes “managing” those processes become people’s whole personality and they carve it out as job protection ha
Why do people push back against process refinement, even when it’s clearly effective both in theory and in practice?
I’ve never quite understood it. Just mentioning it makes people run away.
People hate change. Familiar discomfort better than unknown discomfort
There can also be stag hunt game theoretic dynamics so different risk preferences and also winners / losers in a change. Even if it’s just something as silly as status
So simple but somehow weird reason?
I thought everyone would welcome a better end…
I'm excited to hear the podcast version of this where I hopefully can understand this topic better after my second/third exposure to protocols 😬
It’s taken me a number of exposures too
Great coverage Paul. A few initial thoughts (hopefully worth expanding on later)
1. As a paradox scholar for the past 9 years, it is always amazing what happens to me when I read the word "tensions". My eyes open, and my mind focuses, and lo and behold, a new field that uses the same lingo as my academic field. But, and this is the exciting part, as an independent field of study, reaching similar definitions, independently of existing bodies of literature.
2. I think two challenges arise from the "promise" of protocols.
First, there is an emotional element that seeks solutions to problems. We find it very hard not to box "protocols" as just another solution. Systems are hard to design, hard to control, and hard to master. Worse, they might be harder to "own" and to feel related to. I see a lot of calls for "ownership" from leaders and managers. But how do you own something that can't be inherently managed?
Second, the complexity of the jargon hinders better conversations and stories. I think I got lost somewhere around the middle of the post. I think this is a problem with systems theory, chaos theory, and in this case, protocols. If we want to explore the potential of such ideas, we need to find ways to communicate them more clearly. I recently read the classics by Elyahu Goldratt. My hunch is that his narrative teaching style is perhaps a better way to translate these ideas for general consumption.
I don’t know on #2 but excited they are aware of this challenge.
Agreed on storytelling. I think it will get better. But for now probably more useful to be more complex
Hey Alex, where can I read more about the use of the word tensions in paradox studies?
I would start with the seminal paper from 2011 by Wendy Smith and Marianne Lewis "Toward A Theory of Paradox: A Dynamic Equilibrium Model of Organizing"
It sets a lot of the basic terminology and process. Since published it's gotten more popular and applied in more fields. Would be happy to discuss
Thanks for the lead! I'll take a look. Per your point about not treating protocols as a solution, I think it's just something you have to hammer home every time you bring it up. It's true that people love solutions. But some shit just doesn't go away... Plus, it's hard, but not impossible to make problem management appealing. Stewart Brand is making maintenance sexy. Protocols are a long way from being sexy, but they deserve to be regarded as such
Good stuff. I didn’t realize you were at SoP. I was there at Esmeralda last week running workshop on our internal process improvement initiative at Met. Did you end up going to nor cal?
Regarding the resistance to creative alt career paths, I think the power of life scripts cannot be underestimated. Once upon a time I did my senior thesis on the California dream and being a glutton for punishment expanded that into a book.
I love that you still so highly value intellectual challenge even in your post rat race world. In summary, it seems you really dig theory and ideas just like you did when you were in operations. Similar to that time, I wonder how Protocol Pill ideas are impacted by reality?
We will find out!
And yes I love the intellectual freedom of my own path.
fascinating! reminds me/makes me think of:
- one pro sports team I was at brought in a splashy, former superstar player as temporary CEO. he enacted a load of consultancy style changes which all reverted back as soon as his term was up
- Dominic Cummings has a Startup Party (name TBD) concept for the UK where a new party would gain power, enact a load of structural, protocol type change and then dissolve. might be worth a look.
- what's the best storytelling vehicle for this?
Yeah I think Cummings has a lot of interesting ideas on this. And no surprise he was chased out of government
Have you seen their protocol fiction series? Might be worth a look
Where's the fiction series?
Cummings gets a fair bit of discussion in the Boris Johnson book by Anthony Seldon (does books on every British Prime Minister after their term). he's got loads of interesting ideas and is clearly one of the great campaigners, but Seldon reckons that:
'Had Cummings focused on introducing the changes he identified, he might have become the most remarkable reformer in the hundred years since Richard Haldane, the intellectual, philosopher and politician fascinated, like Cummings, by German thought, by science, technology, intelligence and defence. Haldane helped found the London School of Economics and Imperial College, and pioneered a host of modernizations to government.'
but he didn't spend the time necessary to see through change (15 months in total), didn't make a clear plan for those inside the system and 'he didn’t understand the history. He failed, unlike them, to carry people with him.'
When I think about great leaders, you have to have a positive vision of the future that you sell internally and externally. You can't say 'this is bad' and expect people to come along with you.
He has another side to this story worth telling (they basically
Laughed at his ideas and Boris became obsessed with the news). I don’t know enough to trust but Cummins is very smart (and wisely out of politics for now lol)
oh for sure - definitely not an environment where genuine change would be welcomed. I find the whole thing a fascinating what might have been.
This was very good https://pca.st/episode/7dd7f85c-ad1c-4a42-8491-958cbb72b17b
Deep one Paul, loved it.
I also studied Lean manufacturing for a little bit and really loved it as an idea. I find it hard to 'unsee' now. Afterwards, when I worked a little bit in corporate, I was really surprised at the scale of inefficiencies – I agree that corporate chaos is poorly understood. I assume that, at the margin, the people who implement and oversee systems already are competent and powerful in the context of the current protocol, and changing it causes them marginal hassle and decreases their personal leverage.
I also technically worked in 'Operations' but it was in a fully online company and seems much less fun than bricks and mortar operations.
Got that PDF on protocols, looking forward to checking it out.
By the way, have you read A Pattern Language by Christopher Alexander? It's about patterns moreso than protocols but really nice to dip into. I wouldn't necessarily recommend reading it A-Z but it's a good coffee table book or a good book to read the list of patterns (https://claytondorge.com/patterns-list) and see what appeals to you.