Regular readers of this blog know that I occasionally get stuck on obsessed with themes. Today, two of my recent obsessions (singularity and the trap of either/or thinking) merge into one.
First, a recap. The "knee" is what singularity writers call the point at which exponential change makes a break from linear extrapolation. (Sorry if that's sloppy way of desribing it.) For me, the degree of complexity beyond binary, either/or thinking, is one indicator of a system's (or an individual's) developmental potential.
Furthermore, I believe systems, or individuals, which integrate these two change mechanisms (one, exponential movement; two, away from the either/or and toward the both/and), are on the verge of a knee, a kind of hyper-competitive tipping point (yes, I know, I said I was looking for an alternative phrase, but sometimes you just have to rely on the tried and true; like Martha would say, "flexibility is a good thing.")
Now, systems, let's say companies, for example, that encourage the development of both/and, as opposed to either/or, thinking are sending their people a message: yes you are a designer (for example) but you are also a part of this business system; you are both a designer and a corporate asset. You do not need to choose between those two aspects of your identity, they can, in fact they must, co-exist here. When those two aspects come into conflict, we expect you to manage their integration in the most effective way possible.
In so doing, the company is asking the designer to do what each of us does routinely: to balance priorities; to find "both/and" solutions.
Let's assume that the designer aspect of your identity would invariably lead you to strive for creating aesthetically superior products, products that your design colleagues would find perfect. Let's also assume that the corporate asset aspect of your identity encourages you to continually operate in the most cost-effective manner possible.
The tension between these two parts of your identity is unavoidable. If you are operating in an either/or system, one which encourages you to resolve this tension by coming down on one side or the other, to produce either aesthetically superior product or to pay attention to cost, that system is in trouble in today's competitive environment. Because, today's most successful companies encourage their designers to both produce aesthetically superior product and to pay attention to cost. They encourage their designers to find "the sweet spot."
Over time, as companies develop mindsets and cultures that enable them to leave behind "either/or" and leverage "both/and" thinking (Toyota comes to mind) they will reach a point of hyper-effective/efficient competitiveness, a singularity, that will make them extremely difficult to unseat.
More on this particular obsession in days to come.
Great obsession...I mean post,Tom! Looking forward to more.
The either/or portion of your observations reminds me of the "sex or cash" theory of Hugh McLeod's over at Gapingvoid, www.gapingvoid.com
THE SEX & CASH THEORY: "The creative person basically has two kinds of jobs: One is the sexy, creative kind. Second is the kind that pays the bills. Sometimes the task in hand covers both bases, but not often. This tense duality will always play center stage. It will never be transcended."
Maybe the "sweet spot" will be the undoing of Hugh's prophecy concerning "this tense duality" never being transcended.
Posted by: Michael Wagner | November 28, 2005 at 08:23 PM