Aiden Choles's blog

In South Africa it is taboo to refer to "problems". This is especially true if you are a representative of government.  "No, no, no Mr Interviewer ... I would not say it is a problem. Rather we are faced with a challenge."

People fear that they are in some way resigning themselves to the "un-solvability" of the problem if they utter the very word. Behind this fear lies a a fatalistic way of languaging the issue at hand. Instead, the rhetoric surrounding how we language a problem is pervaded by "challenges". The other perspective on this rhetoric is that by admitting that an issue is a problem, you somehow admit some form of culpability in relation to the problem. And so, referring to a "challenge" displaces the responsibility for not having already solved the problem.

Last night I wrote about a fictional ethical dilemma that panned out in a drama TV series. Today, while driving in the car and listening to talk radio, I came across a current, real-life scenario that challenges how we view ethics in practice. Again, if we are to understand the ethical landscape within our organisations we need ways in which we can monitor the perceptions, values and attitudes that staff have towards ethics.

Today's ethical dilemma comes from a recent shooting of a group of illegal miners at the Aurora Gold Mine ...

The study of complexity has typically found a home within specific disciplines, such as science, philosophy, cognitive science, anthropology and to a lesser extent evolutionary psychology. This landscape intrigues me as you will rarely find a psychologist among a group of complexity thinkers and practitioners. You'll find natural scientists and philosophers in the main. I think this is because the role of psychology in understanding complexity has not received much attention. Complexity is firmly an issue of psychology as well as the other disciplines.

What follows is the beginning of an argument that I'm forming in relation to the prominence that psychology should get within complexity research.

In the wake of numerous price collusion cases brought to the Competition Commission in South Africa, the profile of ethics in organisations has become a focal point for policy makers and leaders alike. Since 1994 the King Committee has been developing guidelines for corporate governance in South Africa. The King 3 Report is the latest installment from the Committee that places a great emphasis on ethics. Our concern is that leaders will apply the prescripts of King 3 in a regimental fashion that will do very little in actually transforming the ethics culture of an organisation. We believe that understanding the ethics landscape of your organisation should be a key factor in leaders minds.

As we think about a narrative-based approach to ethics management, we are certain that characterising the ethics landscape of an organisation will be a complex task. Ethically dubious situations, deals and arrangements will do their utmost to remain hidden. It is because of this that we propose monitoring the attitudes staff have towards ethics as a way in which leaders can identify the ethics hotspots in their organisations. This would be done by providing staff with an ethical dilemma and asking them to provide us with some information regarding their attitudes towards that dilemma.

Here's an example of an ethical dilemma I came across while watching TV the other night ...

We often find that people use the word "complexity" in a range of settings. Most often it is used by your average person on the street to describe a situation or technology that escapes their understanding. And so, in this colloquial use you will hear people lament and say things like, "What can we do? It's so complex." A great analogy that Paul Cilliers, the elder statesman of complexity in South Africa, uses is of his mother's struggle with bank ATMs. To her using an ATM is an amazing complex - it behaves differently every time, sometimes swallowing her card without reason, and frustrating her. To Paul, it's a really simple machine.

Sonja and I have spent the last two days in Stellenbosch with South Africa's leading academics, Paul being one of them, and scientists who address the issue of complexity. It has been a time of questioning the issue of complexity in the South African academic and business landscapes. As we have wrestled with these questions we have realised how precarious the relevance of complexity theory and application is within our country.

In particular, we have wrestled with the different levels of complexity perceived by decision makers, managers and leaders ...

Something interesting happens when you ask someone to share an experience (narrative) AND then ask them to tell you what that story means. Often you'll find that the interpretive layer that a storyteller will construct about their story covers more than what the story itself addresses. The danger of taking a story at face value is emphasized because of this dynamic.

Try and visualise what happens here ...

When presenting, one has to be certain you are okay with receiving questions when you tell the audience you would like the presentation to be a two-way conversation. This was the case for me today. I was speaking to the Cape Town chapter of the SA Organisational Development Network, focussing on our approach to Narrative Change Management. What should have been a 60 minute talk turned out to be a 2.5 hour discussion.

A large focus of my presentation was a case study on the Change Story we developed for a certain organisation. We were working with a team of European consultants on the project who were highly skeptical about a story's effectiveness. Today, after showing a video of one Change Story I passed a comment when discussing the effectiveness of a Change Story that I doubted whether it would have as large an impact in Europe as it does here in Africa.

A hand shot up.

Meetings. More meetings. Many more meetings. This is what many of us see when we take a glance out our diaries. It's a daily drudge. The endless stream of back-to-back meetings is the bane of corporate existence. It's a wonder we get any work done! It's also not surprising that the new coping technique that most meeting attendees employee is called "nod-in".

You know exactly what I'm talking about. Why? Because, if you had to be honest, you know that you employ the technique yourself ...

I've been watching with interest the proliferation of parody spoof Twiiter user accounts over the last while. These spoof accounts have been generated by witty anonymous users to take cheap shots at large, global organisations who are doings things worthy of critique. One of the best examples is the BP Global Public Relations account.

Of all the parody accounts created, the PR-type accounts are the most common and they represent really cynical, sardonic and incisive viewpoints on what big corporates are up to. Anther example is FIFAGlobalPR. One source describes the BPGlobalPR parody:

In the wake of the worst environmental disaster in US history, comedy can still provide healing power, especially when BP (British Petroleum) is the brunt of all jokes.

British Petroleum has reportedly asked Twitter to shut down the account.  Twitter apparently responded by telling BP to fix the leak first (nice!). Here are other examples of the spoof tweets ...