Complexity
This condition of complexity entails the multiplex of forces, the apparently contradictory information flow, the sensitive interdependence of everything we touch. Complexity leads to a sense of confusion in which it’s hard to make smart decisions and to take in alternative perspectives. We must somehow be Clear minded in the midst of confusion. The central concern is sorting out what is most relevant and most easily confirmed.
The opposing perspective on Complexity would center on being Open minded in the midst of confusion. From this perspective, we would be primarily concerned with recognizing and holding on to the multiple realities that imping on us from those people with whom we disagree. The slow thinking introduced by Daniel Kahneman (2013) incorporates both clarity of thought (identifying and setting aside biases and sloppy heuristics) and open-mindedness (consideration of alternative perspectives, practices and options). However, In the midst of pervasive anxiety associated with complex conditions (and the other VUCA-Plus conditions), it is difficult to slow down our thinking.
Ambiguity
The condition of ambiguity concerns the ‘haziness’ in which cause-and-effect are assessed. Causes are hard to attribute. It is hard to navigate in a fog. Relativity seems to trump established rules. Conditions of ambiguity weigh heavily on our ability to hold contradictory data and still function and make choices. From one perspective, Ambiguity requires that we focus on Engaging the Haziness. The primary concern is with establishing a viable “truth” and “reality” upon which one can base and guide their actions. There is another perspective that stands in opposition. This perspective would focus on Tolerating the haziness. The primary concern would center on being patient and willing to remain in a state of “limbo” until such time as the haze clears and actions can be taken. We need to tolerate this ambiguity if we are to somehow listen to and even consider the validity of differing beliefs and perspectives.
Appropriate strategies must be applied in addressing the ambiguity polarity. It is a matter of introducing multiple templates for assessing the nature of any challenging issue. One of these templates concerns the identification and analysis of both the immediate issue (the figure) and the context within which this issue is situated (the ground). A second template concerns the special distance from which a specific issue is being addressed. It should be examined close up (as an intimate narrative) (proximal perspective) and at a distance (as a broad landscape) (distal perspective). The third template involves temporal distance. The issue should be examined as it is currently being experienced (the present time) and as it will probably be (or could be) present at some point ahead of us (the future time). A convening issue can be viewed from multiple perspectives which allows for both immediate engagement and tolerance of certain immediate circumstances—as well as longer term and “bigger picture” engagement and tolerance.
