Safe to fail probes

List of methods / Cynefin® specific methods

A complex system has no repeating and linear relationships between cause and effect, is highly sensitive to small interventions and cannot be determined by outcome based targets; hence when dealing with complex systems there is the need for experimentation. Safe-fail Probes are small-scale experiments that approach issues from different angles, in small and safe-to-fail ways, the intent of which is to approach issues in small, contained ways to allow emergent possibilities to become more visible. The emphasis, then, is not on ensuring success or avoiding failure, but in allowing ideas that are not useful to fail in small, contained and tolerable ways and discover more about the system in the process. The ideas that do produce observable beneficial patterns can then be adopted and amplified when the complex system has shown strong indications of stability, at which stage some of those patterns might become liminal and eventually move out of the complex domain altogether. Where systems and the environments in which they exist become complex, what is known and what can be planned for becomes less certain – introducing and increasing organisational tolerance for failure is more crucial than ever.

The famous Biblical parable of the sower applies here. We sow seeds, some fall on fertile ground, others on impenetrable soil, and yet others sprout but get overgrown by weeds. Our responsibility is to keep sowing the seeds, and tending the ones that are growing; that is all we have control over.

Typical Uses

• Safe-fail probes are usually designed to follow Cynefin creation by social construction.
• Making decisions in situations of high uncertainty.
• As an alternative to traditional strategic planning which place excessive emphasis on ideal future states.
• Stimulating starting conditions for innovation.
• Engender support and consensus for new initiatives to contribute to meaningful change.
• They are always run in parallel around all coherent hypotheses.

Preparation

This activity can be carried out either with individuals, in pairs or in small groups. It is best carried out in small working groups 0f 3-5 participants. The larger the number of groups and participants, the greater the variety of perspectives and iterations. If working with groups of people, carefully review the participants of your workshop to optimise cross-silo grouping of members. This will help produce the tacit outcome of promoting engagement and cooperation amongst people from different departments, ranks of authority and/or organisations.

Have organised working spaces for each group; ideally working in circles with writing surfaces.

Set some ground rules for the participants – on top of the specifications and guidelines laid out in the worksheet, it would also be helpful to create a simple guideline for people to assess their own proposals on (eg. this could be as simple as agreeing to consider any idea that has a remote possibility of creating improvement; or to consider ideas that can only be carried out within a certain time period). This is not critical, but provides a simple guideline and consistent position to adopt when considering proposals for experiments.

Things You'll Need

Worksheets with certain guidelines and areas of concern can be prepared. These help create flexible heuristics around the probes participants should be thinking about. (e.g. What is the probe? Rationale behind the probe? How will the probe be put into action? How might success or other impact be observed?) As these experiments need to be practical and actionable, specific guidelines should also be worked out and specified - such as the time-frame and budgetary limitations that the experiment should work within.

Examples of Actions Forms are at the links below.

- Action Form - Chaotic

- Action Form - Complex

- Action From - Complicated

- Action Form - Simple

Dos and Don'ts

• Do encourage thinking outside of traditional boundaries. Safe-fail probes require and enhance the ability for exploration.
• Do give interesting examples of oblique solutions that illustrate the importance of not thinking in direct, causal relationships, preferably from a different domain than the one you are operating in (see tip below).
• Do make use of Safe-fail probes to promote cross-silo and cross-rank collaboration and sensitisation.
• Do not give direct examples relating directly to the organisation, as this has the effect of patterning how participants start thinking about their problem. Oblique examples from different industries are best for conveying the principle behind this method.
• Don't get involved with the content in any way, your views are not a part of this process.

Workflow

STAGE INSTRUCTION	COMMENTARY & TIPS
Pre-stage? Link to other page? Identify target areas - which (constraints?) have potential to experiment with, to learn about and shift the system?	Ask: What can I change? (out of that set) Where can I monitor the impact of change? (out of that set) Where can I readily amplify success or dampen failure?
Design a portfolio of Safe-to-Fail probes Choose (constraint/issue?) and design a portfolio of probes you could run in parallel to learn and perhaps shift the system with. Think small & local Think “What might happen if …?” Think about radically repurposing a current product/skill for a new context Think about tweaking constraints and “rules” What hasn’t worked in the past but might work now?	Maximize variety i.e. many contradictory experiments at the same time – scan broadly. Probes aim to provide insight and test business hypotheses, not provide 'solutions'. If some probes do not fail, you’re playing it too safe. Design the experiment so that even if it fails you learn something about the system. The definition of what is “safe-to-fail” depends on your specific context Minimal interventions – small, local & recoverable - ensure survivability
Peer consulting - in trios, take turns to present your probe ideas to others for feedback. Provide each other with feedback and suggestions.	Think about things like: Bounded applicability - are the methods chosen appropriate to the context? Are they applying complex facilitation principles? What could be potential unintended consequences? Are they considering dynamics and constraints? You can also use methods like Silent listening and Ritual dissent to probe ideas

In a virtual environment

The method has been conducted in virtual settings with success over a range of platforms.

Thinking about probes in relation to long-term effects

The following series of steps can be considered when probes need to be developed in an environment where the ultimate desirable effects will only emerge on longer timelines. In those cases, safe-to-fail probes are not meant to be monitored based on the ultimate desirable effect, but they are a way to indicate pathways along the way and their interactions emerging with factors beyond the immediate area of interest (for example the social conditions that support and enable a medical intervention):

1. Eliminate any initiative or idea incoherent to natural science
2. For all coherent pathways, identify a timeline and link that to actual and opportunity costs. If that allows early-stage tests to be made, then the normal Safe to Fail approach should be OK, although it is important to watch for unexpected consequences
3. A full human-mediated game can assist to test ideas and sensitise people to a wider range (see Anthro Simulation)
4. SenseMaker® can be used on large populations to get a Wisdom of Crowds identification of the most likely pathways - any non-consensus outliers that emerge through this process might require investigation
5. Exploring whether we can afford to run several experiments in parallel over the ten years, evolving in target and time
6. Looking at the multiple and interconnected determinants of success for each proposal and use them to check the substrate for likely acceptability (that might include Estuarine Mapping)

References

Link to other articles on this wiki if they are relevant.

Articles

Specific articles can be referenced here

Blog posts

Link with commentary

Cases

Link to case articles here or third party material

Method card material

This material will be extracted for the method cards

Front page description

Safe-to-fail probes are a key action strategy in complexity, allowing for emergent and experimental exploration that creates the starting conditions for innovation.

Back of card summary

In a complex system, the recommended action approach is Probe-Sense-Respond – rather than trying to predict the future of a complex system and therefore select the one correct (and high-risk) approach, safe-to-fail approaches open up multiple smaller experiments that approach issues from different angles. Safe-to-fail experiments always run in a portfolio of parallel probes around coherent hypotheses, allowing emergent possibilities to become more visible. As the system responds to the probes, desirable results are amplified and undesirable outcomes are dampened. Safe-to-fail probes open up strategic options while increasing organisational tolerance for uncertainty and failure.

Method Properties - Ratings

Represented by symbols - interpretation/voting scales are:

DJS NOTE - the current examples in slides are not PARALLEL they are single