Dynaxity
Dynaxity (German also: Dynaxität) is an artificial word made up of dynamics and complexity. The term Dynaxity describes the combination of dynamics and complexity . The term originated in the late 1980s and was first used and published by Rieckmann in 1991. It has been picked up by many authors, including a. by Henning and Tiltmann.
The term arose from practical experience in managing complex systems in companies and organizations and deals with the simultaneity of the increase in complexity and dynamics as well as the resulting consequences for the perception, diagnosis and control of such systems.
There are basically four zones to be distinguished: static , dynamic , turbulent and chaotic . The four zones indicate different degrees of dynaxity.
The four zones of the Dynaxity
Zone 1: static
In zone 1 one speaks of quasi-static conditions. Simple, fixed, irrevocable rules, the same operating structures across generations and secure markets are the framework conditions for low dynaxity.
Zone 2: dynamic
Zone 2 describes the normal case of companies: Changed markets, continuous growth, uniform processes and structures, high expenditure for planning, basic controllability of the company in the sense of the so-called "machine model". Data and fact orientation, manuals, norms, standards shape what happens. Task specialization. Decisions are essentially made centrally and overlapping tasks are avoided. Headwork and manual work are separated as far as possible, as is the execution of an activity from its supervision. The environment - and thus also the customer - often appears in Zone 2 as a "disturbance variable".
Zone 3: turbulent
As the dynaxity continues to increase, zone 3, the "turbulent zone", is created. In principle, the management of systems in Zone 3 is possible, but no longer with the same methods. The “mechanistic” approach fails. Rather, a system must be viewed as a living system in which people (partially) autonomously decide on goals and people dominate events with their living and working processes. Zone 3 systems have a high level of momentum, which increases under the pressure of external market turbulence. They are characterized by strong feedback processes - the solution to one problem often creates numerous new ones. High redundancy is another feature of such systems.
Zone 4: chaotic
The basic controllability of systems with high dynaxity is no longer given in zone 4. Zone 4 describes those states in which extremely high complexity and dynamics prevail, but this direction can hardly be controlled. Typical examples of this are civil wars , natural disasters, but also psychotic states of people and systems.
application areas
It is obvious that to manage systems, zone 3 must be the target dimension for many companies and organizations. There are two cases:
a. An organization must, e.g. B. move from zone 2 to zone 3 due to increasingly turbulent markets.
b. An organization is in Zone 4 and, due to its chaotic structure, is in a state that can no longer be controlled, which is characterized by the absolute dominance of chaotic processes. It is important to find ways that allow a return to zone 3.
In this context, Dynaxibility is the ability to use Dynaxity in a zone-appropriate manner.
Rieckmann and Henning / Henning also discuss dynaxibility in the context of ratio and emotio , especially through the factors truth and love. There are two exposed states for the dynaxibility in zone 3:
a. “Love without Truth” : This state of affairs is often observed when organizations and their teams are on the way from Zone 2 to Zone 3. In order to maintain the “security” factor, unpleasant truths are often avoided and numerous “non-aggression pacts” are concluded - mostly unconsciously. Such “cuddle groups” then feel comfortable in the context of the turbulence in Zone 3, but increasingly make less effective management contributions to the organization. The consequences of such behavior can be simulated in seminar environments and overcoming strategies can be tried out.
b. "Truth without love" : The second exposed state in zone 3 describes the process in which the emotional and / or factual level of suffering has become so great that individual or entire groups "pop the truth" - regardless of the emotional Consequences for those affected. Such “brutal gangs” can be observed in teams and companies especially when (too) long (uncomfortable) truths have been kept under the table for the sake of a good working atmosphere.
As an overcoming strategy, Henning describes the concept of “focused” synergy (business oriented familiarity) on the basis of the OSTO system model . It supports team development processes in zone 3 in such a way that people and teams work in a balance between truth and love.
Agile manifest
The agile manifesto of the process design is also used to make a fundamental distinction between zone 2 and zone 3. It generalizes considerations from agile software development and contains the following four guiding principles:
- Executable processes are more important to us than extensive documentation.
- Cooperation with the customer is more important to us than contract negotiations.
- Individuals and their interactions are more important to us than tools.
- It is more important to us to be able to react to changes than to follow a plan.
The first words are more important to us, although the second things have their value. This manifesto makes it clear that managing in Zone 3 is about finding a balance between the principles of Zone 3 (running processes, cooperation with customers, individuals and their interactions, reacting to changes) and Zone 2 (documentation, Contract negotiations, tools, plans). However, when in doubt, the Zone 3 approach should be given priority.
Success factors
For the management principles to be derived from this, Kutscha and Henning suggest :
"1. Always be aware of the situation. 2. Throw all ballast overboard. 3. Build software that is “good enough”. 4. optimize internal processes. 5. Improve cooperation and communication. 6. Build a core team that is 100% focused on success. 7. (Re) build trust and confidence. 8. Work, work and work again. "
Klaus Henning later added another point to these eight success factors: "9. Celebrating after success is an absolute must, so that you keep the desire to get involved again and again."
Individual evidence
- ↑ Heijo Rieckmann: Dynaxibility - or how “systemic” management can work in practice ... In: Klaus Henning, Bertram Harendt: Methodology and practice of coping with complexity. Duncker & Humblot, Berlin 1992.
- ↑ K. Henning, F. Hees, A. Hansen: Surfing Dynaxity. Developments and trends in a globalized world of work from the perspective of international monitoring. In: Inken Gatermann, Myriam Fleck (Hrsg.): The ability to innovate secures the future. Contributions to the 2nd future forum for innovation capability of the BMBF 1st edition. Duncker & Humblot, Berlin 2009, pp. 433-445.
- ↑ K. Henning, F. Hees, A. Hansen: Dynaxibility for Innovation. Global trends in the field of “Working, Learning, Developing Skills”. In: ICERI: International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation. Madrid 2009.
- ^ Tom Tiltmann, Uschi Rick, Klaus Henning: Concurrent Engineering and the Dynaxity Approach. How to Benefit from Multidisciplinarity. In: P Ghodous; Rose Dieng-Kuntz; Geilson Loureiro (Ed.): Leading the Web in Concurrent Engineering - Next Generation Concurrent Engineering. (= Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications. Volume 143). IOS Press, Amsterdam 2006, pp. 488-495.
- ↑ Klaus Henning, Renate Henning: The Chaos Trap - systematically leading in turbulent environments. In: Controller Magazine, Planning and Production. Issue 3/1995.
- ↑ Systemic management - fit for Dynaxity. - https://www.umlaut.com/en/training-learning-experiences/syma-a/
- ↑ Klaus Henning: Traces in Chaos, Christian landmarks in a complex world. Olzog, Munich 1993.
- ↑ Sebastian Kutscha, Klaus Henning: Mission impossible - success factors in the Toll Collect project. In: Klaus Henning, Christiane Michulitz (Hrsg.): Unternehmenskybernetik 2020 - Business and technical aspects of business processes. (= Economic cybernetics and systems analysis. Volume 25). Duncker & Humblot, Berlin 2009, p. 67.
- ↑ Klaus Henning: The art of the small solution. How people and companies master complexity . Murmann Verlag, Hamburg 2014, p. 138.