Complexity of Change

Even the simplest of systems are only as simple as our understanding or perspective allows. For instance, choosing what to have for dinner may be thought of as a simple decision based on available options. If we consider eating habits, preferences, dietary constraints, nutritional effects, etc. then the same system appears more complex (though in reality it was always that complex).

The first perspective’s variables are much easier to manage and understand, the second requires more energy, time and/or resources to understand and manage. However the first perspective also lends less predictive value because it doesn’t consider the primary influencing factors, whereas the second has more predictive value because it does consider those factors.

Each situation has different, but limited, resources to apply to ∆ Frame. As we implement it’s methodology, we might consider when we can a shortcut perspective and when to take a comprehensive one. Thinking about this not as a binary but as a spectrum of effort and accuracy may lend value here; the more comprehensive the approach the more energy required and the more accurate the output is likely to be.