James Drogan

In many of my classes we take up the issue of complexity in systems.  For example, in supply chains,what are the conditions that would lead one to prefer a system comprising multiple simplex systems versus a single complex system?  Or the converse?

Today's New York Times brings an excellent op-ed piece by David Brooks on this matter of complexity (Brooks, D. (2010, May 28). Drilling for Certainty. The New York Times, A23. New York) set within the context of the Deepwater Horizon explosion.  Brooks writes:

Over the past decades, we’ve come to depend on an ever-expanding array of intricate high-tech systems. These hardware and software systems are the guts of financial markets, energy exploration, space exploration, air travel, defense programs and modern production plants.

These systems, which allow us to live as well as we do, are too complex for any single person to understand. Yet every day, individuals are asked to monitor the health of these networks, weigh the risks of a system failure and take appropriate measures to reduce those risks.

Systems spawned by the latest in technology in the minds and hands of innovators often draws a veil over the complexity of the system.

In this graphic (Drogan, J. (2007). Managing the Business. fig. 21) the veil is represented by the vertical line through the oval representing the business system.  Technological progress tends to move the veil to the right, concealing more of the system.  Yet, technology can only be applied if we can write rules for how it should behave in certain circumstances.

However, as has been made evident by the Deepwater Horizon, when one is operating on the frontier, the rules are not always known.  Complexity of situations and the speed at which they develop increasingly depend on the knowledge, skills, and experience in the human mind for resolution.  To do that, the veil must be pushed back to the left.  What's required is a fine balance between man and machine.

This matter of trusting too much in technology has long been on my mind since the early 1970s when I was involved in discussions of how to automate crew calling in the railways.  It is an issue that finds its way into much of my teaching and writing.  It's not clear to me that the rise in complexity can be stopped by anything short of catastrophe.  Nor do I think it can be substantially slowed.  Indeed, it may well be that to continue to sail on Spaceship Earth we must develop increasingly complex systems to make better use of the resources available to us.  We can, however, pay more attention to what, how, and why of what it is we do.

For an interesting read on this subject of complexity see Weick, K., & Sutcliffe, K. (2001). Managing the Unexpected: Assuring High Performance in an Age of Complexity. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons.

"Finally, show some humility. There are anonymous bloggers out there, some self-taught in economics [and other disciplines], who may know more about the functioning of a modern economy[and other disciplines] than you do."

The above is abstracted from An Outsider's View of Modern Macroeconomics that, in turn, was pointed to by A "Must Read" from Rajiv Sethi on Modern Macroeconomics from Maxine Udall (girl economist).

There is unappreciated value in humility.

The title of this post comes from the summary slide from a presentation I did in the spring of 2003.  I was reminded of it by this extraordinary post on the FastCompany blog.  What strikes me first about the post are the results of Fischer's efforts.  There is a real, but in another way abstract beauty in these results.  Represented here is another way to communicate a massive amount of information in a small space in a very short period of time leading, quite possibly, to otherwise unattainable insight.

I hope my friends at BLSCI take note for this is a side of communications we talk little about.

Tokyo couple married by robot in rooftop wedding.

My Thinkpad R60, which had served me well, even surviving a fall off my office desk, finally succumbed. It didn't stop working, but rather "ran out of gas."  Too slow, not enough memory, hard disk running out of space; all the things that happen from time to time.  Apparent failure in the USB ports; autoplay not autoplaying.

I replaced it with a ThinkPad SL510 and began the process of putting the soul into the new machine a couple of days ago.  It's amazing, really, to think about how one tailors, over time (four years in this case) a piece of technology to align with the way one works.  It's not reinstalling the major chunks of software (e.g., Firefox) that is the most fascinating,  but rather the little things that I added in almost a subconscious manner in the continuous effort to make the machine part of me (or is it the other way around).  I continue to discover these little things.

There is the need to get used to a slightly different layout on the keyboard and a slightly different display interface (e.g., the Windows 7 taskbar).  I'm reminded here of the notion that if it isn't broke, don't fix it.  Ah, well, compulsion for change is doubtless in the DNA of the technologist.

The title of this post is suggested by Tracy Kidder's great book, The Soul of a New Machine, now some 28 years old.

Under the leadership of Bernard Schwartz, Herb Brinberg, and Mikhail Gershovich, the Institute put together another highly provocative and valuable symposium on communications and communication-intensive education.  Look here for information about the April 30 meeting.  I've been an attendee and sometime facilitator at these annual conferences since 2002, continually drawn to them by interesting people discussing interesting issues.  I always find myself coming away from the symposia with insights and ideas that, with work (sometimes a little, sometimes a lot), improve the quality of what I set out to do in my daily life.

The highlights for me this year were morning keynote by Clay Shirky, the always highly anticipated and valuable roundtable discussions, and the afternoon keynote (especially the remarks by Mona Siu-Kan Lau of UBS).  Regrettably, I missed the afternoon workshops which, in the past, have also proved of value.

I suspect a substantial amount of the material presented at the symposium will begin to be made available on the Baruch College Digital Media Library in the near future.

This is one of the anticipated events on my yearly calendar.  While this is an invitation only event, invitations may be requested.  I suggest that if communications is a large, important part of what you do, contact the Institute and make a request.