Sunday, 10 March 2013

Sense-making

Sense-making involves turning circumstances into a situation that is comprehended explicitly in words and that serves as a springboard into action. The concept of sense-making fills important gaps in organizational theory. Sense-making is central, it is the primary site where meanings materialize that informs and constrain identity and action.
Although there are others contributing to the study of sense-making, Dervin, Weick and Snowden are the three big names associated with different approaches.
Dervin (1998): Dervin has been developing ideas and working with hundreds of academics since 1972. In her approach, she reconceptualised Knowledge from noun to verb. She relates sense-making to Knowledge Management, especially to do with knowledge creation. It is dynamic, forever changing, which has implications for systems that try to store and transfer knowledge. Dervin (1998) explains some of the problems about knowledge very neately: “Sometimes, it gets shared and codified; sometimes a number of people agree upon it; sometimes it enters into a formalized discourse and gets published; sometimes it gets tested in other times and spaces and takes on the status of facts. Sometimes, it is fleeting and unexpressed. Sometimes it is hidden and suppressed. Sometimes, it gets imprimatured and becomes unjust law; sometimes it takes on the status of dogma. Sometimes it requires reconceptualizing a world. Sometimes it involves contest and resistance. Sometimes it involves danger and death.
According to Weick (1995), sense-making consists of seven aspects - Grounded in identity construction, Retrospective, Enactive and sensible environments, Social, Ongoing, Focused on and by extracted cues, Driven by plausibility rather than accuracy.
Dave Snowden developed the Cynefin Framework in 1999. The Cynefin framework has five environments – Simple, Complicated, Complex, Chaotic and Disordered.
 
adapted from Kurtz, C. & Snowden, D. 2003. The new dynamics of strategy: Sense-making in a complex and complicated world, IBM Systems Journal, vol. 42 no. 3, pp. 462–483
Simple, in which the relationship between cause and effect is obvious to all, the approach is to Sense - Categorise - Respond and we can apply best practice.
Complicated, in which the relationship between cause and effect requires analysis or some other form of investigation and/or the application of expert knowledge, the approach is to Sense - Analyze - Respond and we can apply good practice.
Complex, in which the relationship between cause and effect can only be perceived in retrospect, but not in advance, the approach is to Probe - Sense - Respond and we can sense emergent practice.
Chaotic, in which there is no relationship between cause and effect at systems level, the approach is to Act - Sense - Respond and we can discover novel practice.
Disorder, which is the state of not knowing what type of causality exists, in which state people will revert to their own comfort zone in making a decision. In full use, the Cynefin framework has sub-domains, and the boundary between simple and chaotic is seen as a catastrophic one: complacency leads to failure.

No comments:

Post a Comment