Conference 7.286::digital

    
    Well, Nassar, the organization chart is starting to look
    like a fractal image, so I guess chaos is probably as
    good a word as any to capture what's going on around here.
    
    

    Maybe it's the challenge to create something from the chaos that
    attracts top managers.
    
    Mark

    re .0
    
    It's the latest thing to say if you're a management-type who
    wants to sound dead trendy.  It doesn't mean a whole
    lot really.
    
    Sort of like engineers saying "object-oriented" ...
     

    
    RE : .-1
    
    Yep, more bullcrap.  Kind of like how we were trying to make people 
    think they were "creative" if they know that stupid little trick with
    the nine dots on paper.
    
    

    
    
    Hey 99,  86 here,  chaos wants to see us. 
    
    Ken
    

    My perspective is that "chaos" is a name for the natural state of
    things ( I'm not a mathematician so this is more of a "poetical"
    statement than anything else I guess) but people usually
    like to pretend the natural state of things is "order" 
    and occasionally they get off on thinking they have discovered 
    something when they discover it is really "chaos" they are dealing
    with. So anyway, I guess my two cents worth is that things are 
    naturally in a state of chaos and to manage in chaos is what people
    get paid to do so no big news. Of course, I realiize that poeple
    are making a buck off of the percetion that it *IS* news right now.
    
    Academics of course try to get the world bounded and sequenced in their
    courses, and they can maybe define their sequence of thoughts as 
    "order" and not "chaos". But even there chaos rules eventually, right?
    I mean, wait a while and the lecture notes are molecules of something
    or other floating around somewhere, and the videotapes have crumbled
    to little particles that blow around in the wind, and eventually,
    the universities they teach in are sort of disorganized piles of stone
    or clay, and the papers you wrote your notes on are motes of dust--
    but enough of this! 
    
    I enjoy reading your stuff Nasser.
                       

Re .0:

>    are we in chaos ?

No, Nasser.  This has been analyzed at the very top of the corporate pyramid. 
As David Stone commented in a memo on the Engineering Process sometime before
23-Sep-92,

"
Change does have five distinct phases: Indecision, Decision, Euphoria,
Despair, New Plateau.
"

However, the classical labels for the five phases are: Chaos, Discord,
Confusion, Bureacracy, Aftermath.

The best estimate of our current state is Aftermath.  But keep an eye open for
when the cycle repeats again, because then we will be in Chaos once again.


Re .6:

>    My perspective is that "chaos" is a name for the natural state of
>    things ( I'm not a mathematician so this is more of a "poetical"
>    statement than anything else I guess) but people usually
>    like to pretend the natural state of things is "order" 
>    and occasionally they get off on thinking they have discovered 
>    something when they discover it is really "chaos" they are dealing
>    with. So anyway, I guess my two cents worth is that things are 
>    naturally in a state of chaos and to manage in chaos is what people
>    get paid to do so no big news. Of course, I realiize that poeple
>    are making a buck off of the percetion that it *IS* news right now.

"
HERE FOLLOWS SOME PSYCHO-METAPHYSICS.
If you are not hot for philosophy, best just to skip it.

	The Aneristic Principle is that of APPARENT ORDER; the Eristic
Principle is that of APPARENT DISORDER. Both order and disorder are man made
concepts and are artificial divisions of PURE CHAOS, which is a level deeper
that is the level of distinction making.
"

				Bibliography

SPEEDY""::"/usr/users/amartin/principia"
				/AHM

	re .3:

>    It's the latest thing to say if you're a management-type who
>    wants to sound dead trendy.  It doesn't mean a whole
>    lot really.
>    
>    Sort of like engineers saying "object-oriented" ...

	Oh no, you're not getting away with that! "Object oriented" does
	have a very specific set of meanings and benefits. Of course,
	people being what they are, there are two problems that arise:

	(1) Many (most) people couldn't be bothered to inform themselves
	    what the term means, but feel free to criticize. Try reading
	    a book like Bertrand Meyer's "Object Oriented Software
	    Construction" (there are many other good ones too) and then
	    see how you feel.

	(2) It's precisely not "engineers saying 'object-oriented'" that
	    causes trouble. It's non-technical people who often quite like
	    to pick up a new jargon expression (as a magpie will pick up
	    anything shiny) but resent their own lack of understanding.
	    Then advertising and quasi-marketing people start to think
	    that if they lard their effusions with a thin layer of jargon,
	    they will look better. Not true. This devalues the true use
	    of jargon, which is quite simply specialist communication.
	    How would you like to be operated on by a team of surgeons
	    who didn't use any jargon? "Hey nurse, pass me that funny
	    thin shiny little knife with the kinda bend halfway down!
	    OK folks, now we need to dig out that sort of round purple shiny
	    thing from behind that odd flat bit of bone... and let's
	    keep the amount of splashy red stuff down while we're at it!"

	In line with this suggested approach, why not try reading
	Tom Peters' book "Managing Chaos" and finding out what he means
	by it? It's obviously meant to be a stimulating title, rather
	than an informative one.

	Of course, it's a cinch most of the managers hurling the phrase
	around have never cracked the book. "Managing chaos" can be an
	awfully convenient excuse for never being in control, never
	being informed, never being accountable. But that could never
	happen here.

	/Tom

    While randomness & chaos are naturally found, there is a certain 
    "value" added by some who believe that by being involved, perpetuating
    and "enhancing" the chaos, their value & stature is enhanced.  Those
    that quietly attempt to prevent chaos and move forward in spite of it
    are rarely visible/known to the higher levels, but many of us know who
    they are and we value them accordingly.
    IMHO
    Mark
    .

    If the statement "out of chaos comes order" is true
    when this is all done we will be the most orderly
    company the world has ever seen. ;)

    I think of "managing chaos" to be more like surfing. You ride a
    powerful wave, you know it is heading for shore, but apart from that
    the details of the ride are not predictable - you could end up with
    sand in your suit and a mouth full of salt water!
                                                 
    :-)
    
    		--Catherine--* 

    Having read "Thriving on Chaos" (and assuming that this is or is close
    to the source of the "managing chaos" phrase) my impression is that
    "chaos" in business refers to a continually more competitive business 
    environment.  The distinction among management styles has to do with 
    attitudes like "this is how things are done here, we always do it this way" 
    versus responding actively to a business world is rapidly evolving.  It
    involves embracing the idea that it is vital to be a central force working 
    with and promoting "chaos" instead of fighting against it.  In such an
    environment I suppose a company is doomed if it is not nimble and decisive 
    -- or if it stagnates and runs out of money.
    
    Steve

    
    More like "Entropy Management" (Entropy also being a term used in
    information theory, as well as systems science - entropy causes
    object oriented programming to becoming objectionably disoriented.)
    
    If you accept that degradation into chaos is the natural order of
    things, then managing entropy allows you to control your rate of
    descent into chaos.  This is called the management/entropy parachute -
    the evolution of a system for the conservation of useful energy in an
    organisation or system, via the skilled control of available resources. 
    For example, if you observe that the rate of descent into chaos is
    faster than you would like, you jettison some weight - grunts are good,
    old buildings are even better as they weigh a lot more than grunts. 
    Hardware is next and finally, managers (most organisations prefer to
    smash into the ground before reaching this point).
    
    Smart Harvard professors, eager for a spot on PBS, are already
    polishing the concept of Business Entropy, and writing papers that
    warn of dire quincequances unless you drop the current hot potato
    in business skills education and get into Entropy Management(TM).
    
    Regards,
    
    Colin
    
    (c)1993 - Entropy Enterprises Inc.
                                                      

    Chaos theory as applied within the management context is a bit
    misleading.  Chaos here does not refer to "utter confusion", but to
    bounded uncertainty.
    
    Like all management theories, take with large pinches of salt.
    
    I have found the value of the chaos idea is that it gives you a new way
    of looking particularly at businesses and change which is quite
    different from traditional concepts based on control, stasis etc.
    
    If this helps you understand what actually goes in organisations (or
    systems), from a strategic point of view, especially during change,
    then it may promote the building of more effective and adaptive
     organisations.
    
    But then again...
    
    Peter

    
    The idea of "management of chaos" is illogical.  The term itself
    is an oxymoron.  My guess is that it was invented by a management
    guru who will make some money on it by selling the trite idea
    that "Chaos Is Good" to gullible and unsuspecting middle managers.
    These managers, in their headlong rush to grab onto the latest trendy
    buzz phrase, will damage their businesses and end up laying off 
    more people.
    
    We could call this Jurassic Park management, I suppose.
    
    All of the foregoing, as always, is IMCO (in my curmudgeonly
    opinion).
    
    Glenn        
    

    
    There has already been a book published with respect to chaos and
    management. I believe it was called "Thriving on Chaos", I have
    forgotten the author's name. I first heard of the book back in 1987
    I think.
    		fred deady

    
    RE: .16
    
    "Thriving on Chaos"  Tom Peters
    
    cbc