Pandemics, more wars than ever before, heat waves, melting glaciers and political upheaval: we are living in an era of increasing complexity, chaos and uncertainty: From VUCA to BANI, the ‘unpredictability of the world’ is greater today than ever before. Many people find it difficult to get used to the fact that ‘the old rules of “it won’t happen” and “basically everything will stay the same” are increasingly no longer valid,’ as psychologists Eva Lermer and Matthias Hudecek write in their book ‘Uncertainty’ [1].
From the dot-com bubble to the financial crash
These general feelings of security, which existed primarily in the ‘global North’, began to break down in the 1990s with the dot-com bubble of Internet start-ups and later with the financial crisis of 2008. To represent such developments, the US Army War College coined the term VUCA: the world had become more Volatile, Uncertain, Complex and Ambiguous.
After the financial crisis and in the wake of digitalisation, the formula gained traction in many circles and led, among other things, to the trend of self-organisation. Holacracy, which emerged from sociocracy, was a direct response to the VUCA world: because hierarchical structures were (and are) inadequate in fast-paced environments, many companies and organisations have reduced or even dissolved them.
Today, we are experiencing the next level of uncertainty: disruptive events are becoming more frequent, fears are growing — we find ourselves in a “BANI” world. BANI now describes a reality that has become Brittle, Anxious, Nonlinear and Incomprehensible. Futurologist Jamais Cascio coined the term BANI.
What to do in BANI or VUCA situations?
The world is indeed becoming increasingly incomprehensible. This creates uncertainty. The swelling abundance of information does not provide any certainty. It does not lead to a better understanding. On the contrary, this flood of information is more like throwing hay on top of a needle: it becomes even harder to find and thus impossible to navigate. And because ‘situations with a high degree of uncertainty, i.e. little sense of control, create unpleasant conditions’ — as Lermer and Hudecek write — a kind of background noise of unease spreads. We might try to suppress this, but it keeps coming back: a kind of mental tinnitus, so to speak.
What can organisations do?
- What does it mean for an organisation’s practices when the world becomes more complex and chaotic?
- When unpredictability and incomprehensibility become constant companions and uncertainty becomes a permanent state?
- How should we behave, what should we do?
First and foremost: because the outside world is threatening, it is all the more important to ensure stability and reliability within the organisation. This starts with a culture of appreciation and the promotion of employee well-being. (more see columns about organisational culture and well-being).
A systemic view is needed
Before continuing, here is a brief aside on the systemic view:
Humans tend — presumably for evolutionary reasons — to draw conclusions about future developments directly from past experiences.
This has worked quite well for a long time. However, social developments are now more dynamic and contradictory. The future no longer follows a straight line from the past, but results from a complex interplay between disruption and its consequences, as well as trends and counter-trends — as described by the futurologists around Matthias Horx.
The Cynefin model has proven to be a helpful tool for systematically classifying situations and developing options for action.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cynefin_framework_2022.jpg
The model distinguishes between four main areas of reality, each of which is classified according to specific criteria. In the case of a complex problem — recognisable by its high degree of dynamism, many unknowns, difficulties in forecasting and uncertainty about what is cause and what is effect — possible actions must first be tried out in order to learn how they work and then adapted for dissemination. In short: try, recognise, react — recognise again and continuously adapt your actions.
Complex situations are becoming more common
It is precisely this area that is becoming increasingly important for organisations: it is not that there are no longer any cause-and-effect situations; complex situations have simply become more common, both in organisational development and in campaigns.
The first step is to recognise what kind of situation you are dealing with. Be careful when using causal sentences that give the illusion of simplicity. One example of this is the failed heating law of a previous German coalition government, which said:
‘If gas and oil heating systems are replaced with heat pumps, less CO2 will be released into the atmosphere and the climate will be protected.’
What sounds clear and logical is highly complex, and so there were fierce side effects when the draft was published — such as opposition from homeowners and the Bild newspaper. It had to be withdrawn, and trust was shaken. It would probably have been better to test the law in one city, for example, in order to learn what accompanying measures are needed.
In the Cynefin model, action is derived from classification. Illustrated by the example of an injured or sick person: clear things — fever, pulse, type of wound — can be measured or assessed independently, and clear action can be taken as a result, e.g. disinfecting an abrasion. If a blood count is needed to identify the problem, expertise is required for measurement and interpretation. This is the complicated, but also causal area: if there is too little X in the blood, then it has effect Y, e.g. too little iron leads to fatigue.
Apparently clear situations can turn out to be complex
The situation becomes complex when a medication prescribed for deficiency X has side effects that depend on the patient’s physical or mental condition. The effect is observed and the medication is adjusted: depending on the severity, a lower dosage, an alternative medication or a combination with another medication may be necessary. It is impossible to predict what will happen in individual cases — for example, feedback effects that exacerbate symptoms may occur. The only option is careful trial and error. And things get chaotic if the patient collapses unexpectedly. Immediate intervention and simultaneous observation are then necessary in order to be able to continuously adjust the intervention.
Out of habit and because it is more convenient, situations are classified — mostly unconsciously — as clear or complicated.
This allows us to fall back on what we know and react according to the causal if-then pattern. Because dealing with complexity is (more) demanding. These are chicken-and-egg constellations in which it is no longer possible to determine what is cause and what is effect. This means taking the time to try things out and observe impartially how things develop. Of course, this is only possible if the to-do list is not overflowing.
This was the case with VUCA and remains so with BANI.
Complex social problems can’t be simply solved
The pandemic highlighted that social problems are often too complex to be solved with mechanical campaign methods. Linear cause-and-effect mechanisms often exist in well-established routines and stable environments, but they can be misleading in complex situations. For non-profit organisations, this means that they should align their creative drive more closely with an observant and responsive approach – solution-oriented openness to results instead of problem fixation. Interventions in the system always have various effects and side effects, which are signs of an intervention. This applies to both campaigns and organisational development.
Conclusion — ‘VUCA/BANI-compliant’ thinking
Einstein’s bon mot that problems cannot be solved with the same mindset that created them, underscores the fact that ‘BANI-compliant’ thinking must be systemic. It is not just about innovative technology, but also about eco-social innovations. Often, the challenge is not to invent something new, but to look at what already exists and is growing from a different perspective and lead it in new directions. For more on this, see: The Problem with Fixating on the Problem.
NGOs do not have the power to directly prevent or resolve social crises. However, in complex and disruptive situations, they can play an important role in cushioning developments and helping to shape them constructively. If the various forms of self-organisation were a response to the VUCA world, they are even more so in the BANI world: in order to bring about change externally, an internal environment that is stable and empowering is needed.
- Rigid decision-making processes are no longer effective; purpose and strategies are frameworks, not fixed guidelines.
- Agile, non-hierarchical forms of organisation are needed that distribute power and responsibility and have empowered employees who can take responsibility.
In addition, cooperative decision-making is required so that decisions are supported. Growing uncertainty and new challenges require an organisational culture that does not leave employees alone, but supports them and offers them psychosocial support through peer learning formats.
This also means that specialist knowledge should no longer be the primary recruitment criterion; social skills and methodological know-how are just as important. Psychologists Martin Seligman and Gabriella Kellerman describe these personal and social skills of the BANI world in their book Tomorrowmind [2], namely five abilities that they abbreviate to PRISM:
- Prospection: the ability to focus on the future
- Resilience: the ability to bounce back
- Innovation: the ability to think creatively
- Social connectedness: the ability to form relationships
- Mattering: the ability to recognise significance
This does not mean that an individual simply needs to think positively and that will be the end of it.
Resilience is not primarily an individual ability that allows us to pull ourselves out of the quagmire of a crisis by our own bootstraps.
While crises do offer opportunities, they remain crises nonetheless. Dealing with and accepting distressing feelings such as powerlessness, fear or uncertainty is often easier in a group than alone. That is why self-help groups are so effective. Viewing the team or a working group somewhat as a self-help group could be one approach.
Lessons learned from COVID — from a personal systemic perspective
- Continuous learning: Observe the effects of measures over the course of a campaign, learn from them and adapt them on an ongoing basis.
- Seek light in the darkness: When faced with complex problems, find approaches that work elsewhere, learn from them and disseminate them.
- Find indicators for an overall picture: initially, deaths and case numbers were the only indicators because the first priority was to prevent the healthcare system from becoming overwhelmed. However, these only showed a small part of the reality. Try to anticipate the side effects of measures; at the very least, they must be identified early on.
- Surveys as a way of taking the pulse are also indicators: identify who feels disadvantaged in order to plan accompanying measures; interest groups or vocal freedom advocates provide clues (according to the prevention paradox: because the effects were less severe than feared due to the protective measures, this was reason for some to loudly proclaim that the measures were excessive).
- Complexity must be reduced – but not too early and not too drastically: a single indicator such as case numbers leads to misjudgements.
- Accompanying measures: cushion the consequences of measures, such as short-time working during the pandemic, and also provide for environmental protection measures to reduce resistance — see the German Heating Act.
What do you think?
Share a reply about your experiences below.
Literature
[1] Unsicherheit – Globale Herausforderungen psychologisch verstehen und bewältigen, Eva Lermer and Matthias Hudecek, Reinhardt Verlag 2022
[2] Tomorrowmind – Thriving at Work with Resilience, Creativity, and Connection―Now and in an Uncertain Future, Gabriella Kellerman and Martin Seligman, 2023: An interesting view from the perspective of positive psychology, although in my opinion with little systemic insight and little scepticism towards the BANI world and its drivers. It is accepted as reality or the future without question.
Based on an original German article published by B’VM.
