Tell stories to tame complexity.
‘Why can’t we do x?’ ‘It’s complicated.’
Big organisations and government departments are palaces of entropy. Both spend a lot of energy on the corporate equivalent of scrambling egg; writing clever policies, building IT systems, signing contracts. If they decide later they would prefer that egg boiled, the prospect of squashing together bits of scrambled egg back into their dream breakfast ovoid looks impossible. Far better then, to just live with scrambled egg, and maybe add some seasoning, or tomato, or whatever. Those accompaniments will make it even harder to turn it back into a boiled egg of course, but adding to the mess is the only option most organisations have at their disposal.
Saying ‘it’s complicated’ might then be a wise strategy. If all that’s achieved by being proactive is to add more complexity, maybe it is better to sit still and not make things even worse.
The problem comes when the situation is so scrambled that retaining it presents a profound threat to the whole enterprise. There are plenty of examples where complexity apparently obscures any path to reaching a widely desired goal. Achieving peace in Ukraine or Afghanistan, perhaps, or retaining an NHS that is free at the point of use in a country with a growing, ageing population.
Trekkies out there may see that this could be time to deploy a Kobayashi Maru strategy; if you’re faced with a no-win scenario, change the rules of the game. Start again with a fresh egg, clear away the scrambled mess.
There’s merit to this. Beginning with a blank sheet is a tried and tested method for transforming big organisations. In the corporate world, it tends to stem from a new CEO taking power. If Iron Man and Star Wars are anything to go by, Bob Iger taking over at the head of Disney is a recent example of this working well. Similar tricks have been tried in government, with crack teams backed by political patronage. The Government Digital Services of Australia, US and the UK, the PMSU and PMDU of old.
The problem with blank-sheet creation myths is that new beginnings are never that clear cut, and sometimes just not possible. In governments and international relations, there are centuries of entropy in the form of regulations, histories, institutions, alliances and people that cannot be swept away. All the new central digital teams arrived at a table covered with scrambled egg.
Certain things set successful fresh starts apart. They make real progress in their efforts to clear the mess. But one of their more neglected qualities is the ability to tell powerful stories. They counter ‘it’s complicated’ by combining intellectual appeal with emotional punch.
Bureaucracies are often uncomfortable about the idea of stories. Perhaps the word sounds too political, too svengali. But they kid themselves, because officials actually spend huge amounts of time writing stories. They’re just not very good. They’re often disguised as ‘narratives’ or ‘strategies’. The principle is the same. A typical strategy is just a bloodless story; like instructions for an IKEA flat-pack. There’s a beginning, middle and end, but who cares?
There aren’t that many good stories. Christopher Booker reckons there are seven basic plots. He worked on his supporting argument for 34 years, so I’m not going to argue with him.
One of the plots Booker picks out is ‘Overcoming the Monster’. This is where a protagonist sets out to defeat a threatening antagonistic force. This basic idea underpins thousands of tales, from Beowulf to every single Bond film ever.
Many successful disruptors tell a version of the overcoming the monster story. That means that have to create their adversaries. They might be real figures and organisations, or more nebulous concepts like the ‘forces of conservatism’ (Tony Blair’s favourite).
When I worked in GDS, it seemed to acquire adversaries all the time. The point, I think, was not to make conflict for the sake of it. It was because a simple story with some obvious antagonists makes complicated problems seem less so.
Story: We’re building services so good people prefer to use them.
Implicit: People have been shafted by x, y and z for decades.
This gave people emotional shortcuts. ‘We’re the good guys with the good ideas. They’re the bad guys with the bad ideas. Of course we’re here to save the day.’ Interestingly, GDS’ new chapter will probably need a new story. I look forward to seeing it.
They need one, because just as disruptors have a strong incentive to cut through complexity with good stories, incumbents have an equally strong reason to prevent this happening. Some argue that Vladislav Surkov, a senior advisor to Russian President Vladimir Putin, has done exactly this in Ukraine. By financially supporting groups who support and groups who oppose his boss, and telling the world he is doing so, Surkov is following a doctrine that he calls ‘non-linear war’. The objective is not to win, but to create instability and confusion. To drown stories in a sea of words.
Though I’m not saying that incumbents in broken bits of government would do this, obviously.
One last thing. Teams must avoid capture by their own stories. Start believing all your own bullshit and you’re in trouble.
Because when you step out of the cinema, eyes blinking, little of the complexity has actually gone away. It may never. But a good story can give you the space to try fixing it, one snag at a time.
@ad_greenway
I am an ex-civil servant, and will write for commissions, retweets and unalloyed praise.
