The place of MISSION
Organisations exist to deliver their mission.
Something the founders and any significant influences over time forged as the glue that binds the assets that make up the organisation
A place for VISION
The intent therefore is for all the assets to be working simultaneously towards the current vision that is the confluence of all of the influences from the world at large arriving at the organization’s boundaries and evoking a reaction that is aligned to the mission
Oh shit here comes AI
If not now very soon all organisations will have all of their actions influenced by AI. Either directly because they adopted themselves or indirectly because the world around them has adopted it to such a large extent that every action will need to consider AI’s analysis and response. Things will increasingly have to co-operate and interoperate with AI agents.
For example there are plenty of papers on hybrid teams, there social and ethical considerations because there becoming a reality.
oh crap it gets worse…
And that brings us to the point of Agentic AI. Purpose driven autonomous decision making algorithms
They will pretty much instantaneously throw up (exploit the competitions?) dichotomies caused by inconsistencies in an organization’s definition and activities.
agentic
Social cognition theory perspective in which people are producers as well as products of social systems.
Milgram’s theory about the agentic state which is the psychological state the obedient subject is in when he or she is obeying authority.
And when the agent is a smart contract held on the Blockchain…
The place (?) of BIG
My take on the purpose of BIG is axiomatically to provide a top to bottom side to side rationale for adherence to The principles of "people planet VALUE (not profit)” as a holistic triumvirate
The historical journey to here sensibly codified project management
and then saw that it wasn’t enough:-
so added program management and
then saw that it wasn’t enough:-
so added portfolio management
and has not yet quite understood that:-
Portfolio management is a single integrated run and change topic (corporate ambidexterity)
In parallel with that we saw the (bloody obvious) fact that codified project management was not the whole answer
hence
the agile movement that was unfortunately toxic about anything ‘competing’ when it was actually all complementary and has mostly burnt itself out in a frenzy of certification wars and is being replaced in many marketing combatant’s models has “hybrid” (A return to pre-codified mélange ~= to ‘common sense’).
The totality for me is Care for Capital™, Also expressed by me as Organisational Agility also expressed as Holistic Governance
This focus views every organisation as a collection of different forms of capital (Assets under Management/ Curation/ Herded Cats ), that have permeable boundaries and whose assets (balance sheet) only exist as a cohesive enterprise while it is in sympathetic harmony with or outperforming the context that it is within
Thus we need agile and pmbok and most other frameworks including governance and artistic considerations within a multi-dimensional tapestry that honours people’s preferences and irrationalities as affected by fashion and global events in a continuously dynamic set of relationships…
BIG has wonderful potential.
A lot of it still has a 20th century mindset.
It will take the world’s organisations a while to transition themselves into one in which Agentic AI is pervasive but it is already shaping markets and services.
Along side Recurrent Neural Nets that analyse markets for advantage will be Distributed Autonomous Organisations that democratise ownership and place those agentic processes as smart contracts (Terms & Conditions, Causes and Effect, Trigger and Responses, State Models) within the blockchain
BIG’s need and purpose and trajectory could all be moved into the 21st century with a little change in wording and a big change in outlook.
Encouragement of conversations to allow this observation to be debated would be valuable
2¢
