The document discusses the concept of constraint management as opposed to traditional governance, highlighting the need for active engagement and retrospective coherence rather than adherence to best practices. It contrasts various management approaches, including Taylorism and emergent practices, emphasizing the limitations and dynamics of each. Key insights include the role of instinct and relational energies in shaping organizational behaviors and decision-making processes.

1. 7/10/2016
1
Thinking About
Constraints
Tony Joyce
@tonyjoyce
Premise
 Dave Snowden ‫‏‬@snowded Jun 21 Helsinki,
Finland tweeted
 “We need to stop talking about
governance and start talking about
constraint management”
 https://twitter.com/snowded/status/745169981776629760
 My (almost sent) reply
 Is governance akin to “best” practice?
 And what other practices do we need to
talk about?

2. 7/10/2016
2
Constraint
Management
Algorithm
Gut Feel
(instinct)
Governance
 From Wikipedia 2016
A complexity assessment
The Practices
Emergent
practice
Constraint
Management
Active engagement
to overcome
propensities,
reinterpretation of
history
Good practice
Algorithm
Encoding of
knowns, local
coherence,
propensity to
techno fetishism
Novel practice
Gut Feel
(instinct)
Emergence from
people + context,
no predisposition,
only retrospective
coherence
Best Practice
Governance
Within known
contexts,
predisposed to
status quo, stability
& avoidance

3. 7/10/2016
3
Cynthia Kurtz’s Tetrahedron
Models (relational energies)
Taylorism &
hierarchical
management
Taylorism &
hierarchical
management
Anthro-centric systems
Constraint
Management
Algorithmic
Instinctive
(naïve
experts)
Governance
SystempropertiesrevealedSystempropertiesrevealed
SystempropertiessuppressedSystempropertiessuppressed
Amplify relations
Suppress relations
rituals
designed to
modulate
decisions
rules
designed to
modulate
behaviors
“We know
more than
we can say”
(Snowden)
“We know
more than
we can say”
(Snowden)
Disinter-
mediation
Intermediation