Complexity characterises the behaviour of a system or model whose components interact in multiple ways and follow local rules, meaning there is no reasonable higher instruction to define the various possible interactions.
The stem of the word “complexity” – complex – combines the Latin roots com (meaning “together”) and plex (meaning “woven”). Contrast “complicated” where plic (meaning “folded”) refers to many layers. A complex system is thereby characterised by its inter-dependencies, whereas a complicated system is characterised by its layers.
Complexity is generally used to characterize something with many parts where those parts interact with each other in multiple ways, culminating in a higher order of emergence greater than the sum of its parts. Just as there is no absolute definition of “intelligence”, there is no absolute definition of “complexity”; the only consensus among researchers is that there is no agreement about the specific definition of complexity. However, “a characterization of what is complex is possible”.
A complex adaptive system has some or all of the following attributes:
- The number of parts (and types of parts) in the system and the number of relations between the parts is non-trivial – however, there is no general rule to separate “trivial” from “non-trivial”;
- The system has memory or includes feedback;
- The system can adapt itself according to its history or feedback;
- The relations between the system and its environment are non-trivial or non-linear;
- The system can be influenced by, or can adapt itself to, its environment;
- The system is highly sensitive to initial conditions.
in references: steven johnson’s emergence; jane jacob’s d & l of city
steven.. emergence.. jane
A complex system is a system composed of many components which may interact with each other. In many cases it is useful to represent such a system as a network where the nodes represent the components and the links their interactions. Examples of complex systems are Earth’s global climate, organisms, the human brain, social and economic organizations (like cities), an ecosystem, a living cell, and ultimately the entire universe.
Complex systems are systems whose behavior is intrinsically difficult to model due to the dependencies, relationships, or interactions between their parts or between a given system and its environment. Systems that are “complex” have distinct properties that arise from these relationships, such as nonlinearity, emergence, spontaneous order, adaptation, and feedback loops, among others. Because such systems appear in a wide variety of fields, the commonalities among them have become the topic of their own independent area of research.
and after taking in Dave Snowden‘s ted on complexity:
via Tim fb share
Complexity, citizen engagement in a Post-Social Media time | David Snowden | TEDxUniversityofNicosia- feb 2017
we’ve compounded order w outcome based assessment.. if look at history of last 40-50 years.. everything has to have a target.. a defined outcomes.. and it has to be a number.. the reality is.. all of the scientific evidence.. says that when human beings are pursuing explicit targets it destroys intrinsic motivation..t..
there is no evidence to contradict that.. and where do we most need intrinsic motivation.. in health and in education and where do we impose the worst targets.. in health and education.. so we need to start to think differently about this.. and we need to move away from this primitive dichotomy in which we contrast one highly structured system w an absolutely chaotic system into something more sophisticated..
2 min – there is actually a third type of system which exists in nature.. its a complex adaptive system.. a system defined not by its structure but by its connectivity
in a complex system everything is connected w everything else.. but many of the connections cannot be known.. ie: the internet; humanity; .. understanding these and understanding how we manage them is critical.. and it’s not about control.. it’s about understanding the connections about changing the linkages
3 min – if we assume a system is chaotic (children acting w/o constraints behavior is random.. at party).. drugs/alcohol.. personal discovery.. house burn down
4 min – order systems approach.. taught in all business/management schools.. critically important to agree learning targets for the party in advance of the party itself.. project plan for party where can measure progress.. adult start party w lecture.. if at any point.. children not happy.. hire happiness training consultant who will train them to be very very happy
6 min – complex systems approach.. much simpler.. draw line in sand.. look children squarely in the eye and say.. cross that and you die.. on the need for flexible boundaries
7 min – stop trying to treat an ecological problem as if a mechanical problem..
so.. finding new ways to deal with this.. because have to understand what’s going on.. you can only understand a complex system by *understanding the small particular parts of day to day interaction
for humans.. those are the anecdotal data of the school gate.. the street story.. the beer after work.. they’re not the grand narratives of workshops.. it’s the day to day anecdotes of people’s existence..
and we need to understand them thru the voice of the people that tell them.. not thru an ai machine interpreting the text or an expert making them fit their cultural expectations.. people’s own voice has to be subject to their one interpretation
8 min – in order to do that we have to engage people.. and people have had enough of surveys.. enough of focus groups.. we used to trust experts and now we’re trying demagogs for a change.. the reality is we actually hand over a lot of cognitive processes to structures.. it’s not based on ourselves as individuals.. t.. so in order to do that we have to engage people..
yes.. via the above.. ie: the anecdotal data of the school gate.. the street story.. the beer after work
9 min – ie: s wales .. girls rugby club as agent of change in some of rural communities.. we give them tools to capture their experiences..t.. and the experiences that people try to recruit..
in schools.. give tools to children to go into communities and gather stories on those communities.. they become ethnographers.. rather than rely on outside experts..
we have the means for 7 bn people to tell their own story .. ie: daily curiosity.. and to facil that.. because.. as nice as it sounds.. (and granted it’s way better than what we’re doing now).. having children in school is still outside experts
the goal is to allow people to become ethnographers to their own condition.. quantitative rather than qualitative.. over last 30-40 yrs seen many attempts at digital story telling .. but nobody thinks about how to scale it..t.. and nobody allows people to tell what their story really means.. because that’s done by the people who gather it..
10 min – in order to get there we have to empower people.. and power comes from the power to interpret your narrative.. not from the power to actually hand your narrative over to *somebody else..
*even sweet.. young.. local girls..
in order to do that we have to find a way to scale.. several key elements:
1\ need to work w abstraction.. art comes before language in human evolution.. the ability to abstract allows for scientific invention.. in fact.. the overemphasis on stem education around the world.. will destroy scientific creativity.. w/o art there is no invention.. if move up level of abstraction.. avoid gaming
2\ need to increase cognitive load.. because we need to use the popular language to have people thinking slow not thinking fast..t.. we need reflection.. not the immediate response you get on questionnaires
how about really slow..deep.. daily reflection.. by allowing/facil ing.. perhaps idio-jargon.. as popular language
12 min – quant backed up by qual
if you focus on information.. you radically reduce human knowledge.. it’s far more than what we can write down..t
then of course.. have to find a way to enact what comes out of that.. find a way to make real change.. a whole new theory of change..
14 min – two sets of data.. on left.. people are giving up and doing what they need to to survive.. on right.. people have to break rules to treat patients empathetically..
how do we change that..? a traditional change mech.. and this is the engineering culture.. would define a desire future state and try and close the gap.. that’s bad complexity science.. in complexity what matters is we describe the present and we make small changes in the present to nudge the system in the right direction
but i don’t mean the conventional approach of behavioral econ.. nudge econ.. that’s more yanking than nudging.. it decides where it wants people to be and tries to tug them toward it..
what we want to work at is where people are and see when it’s ready to change..
or not change .. right..? or.. notice that it’s always changing.. listen to and facil that
in this case what i look for in complexity is called an adjacent possible.. a cluster of stories/narratives.. near to where i am but going in the right direction..
15 min – this is called a vector measure.. i don’t measure outcomes .. i measure vectors.. direction and speed of travel for intensity of effort..
shortening lag between intension and action
what can i do w/in the compass of my power to create more stories like this and fewer stories like that
a story about people grokking about what matters
16 min – we need to start doing small things in the present rather than massive things in future.. because that just leads to perpetual disappointment
that is called fractum engagement.. (fractal.. sustainable).. where new key concepts of citizen engagement worldwide.. starting to pair people… trans generational..
fractal thinking et al
18 min – multiple mass fractal engagement to achieve genuine sustainable change in society.. based on scientific approach not an engineering approach.. based on managing a complex ecosystem rather than trying to maintain a machine..