November 3rd lies exactly eight weeks into the future. In the interim we will be in a period of extreme VUCA. If you are a new or casual reader of these postings you may not understand what I am implying by saying it will be a period of extreme VUCA. Even if you know the term, either from your own experience, or through reading these notes, let me describe VUCA to you.
VUCA is the acronym that is derived from the first letters of volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous. I like the definition and history that appears in Wikipedia.
VUCA is an acronym – first used in 1987, drawing on the leadership theories of Warren Bennis and Burt Nanus – to describe or to reflect on the volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity of general conditions and situations; The U.S. Army War College introduced the concept of VUCA to describe the more volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous multilateral world perceived as resulting from the end of the Cold War. More frequent use and discussion of the term “VUCA” began from 2002 and derives from this acronym from military education. It has subsequently taken root in emerging ideas in strategic leadership that apply in a wide range of organizations, from for-profit corporations to education.
As I have stated before, I first encountered the term while attending a series of seminars for CEOs and senior executives at MIT’s Sloan School. I was immediately fascinated by both the description and the response that was advised. It has been rare for me to share the term and not get the feedback that it is an apt description of the current world and life as we know it. The idea that the world is becoming “more VUCA” has been a recurrent thought for me with the confluence of COVID-19 with its devastating impact on our economy, the resurgence of racial tensions since the tragic death of George Floyd, the heightened partisanship in the run up to the election, the emerging weather catastrophes and fires as global warming becomes a more focused concern, and the emerging fear that we will not have a fair election, and that if he loses, the president may not accept the result and attempt to stay in office.
Back when the world was more “simply uncertain,” and in retrospect, was in a more tolerable state of VUCA, I would introduce the term, and then after a pause say to my listener, if in a one on one conversation, or my audience, if I was speaking to a group, “Never fear, there is a strategic approach that can work in a VUCA world.” I would point out that usual approaches to problem solving and management were too slow and too dependent on data that in a VUCA world is often not available. New approaches and attitudes are necessary to be effective in a VUCA world where the environment is rapidly changing in new and hard to predict ways. I will attempt to get to a description of those attitudes and strategies after a little bit more discussion of why what we are experiencing is rightfully described as “Mega VUCA.”
COVID-19, without the other associated problems like racial strife and the election, is a good reference point for an examination of the basic characteristics of VUCA. Last March the pandemic burst into our lives with the ferocity of a fire that was out of control. After two months of casual observation in January and February, it was suddenly obvious that COVID was a volatile problem for the world, and not just China.
There was a tremendous amount of uncertainty about what to do. Many things were suggested, and much of what was suggested was resisted because there was uncertainty about the necessity of taking drastic actions like the lockdown, and even personal actions like social distancing and wearing masks. It did not take long to appreciate the uncertainty that enhanced our challenge, and overwhelmed our federal leadership. What should we do about PPE? Which populations were most vulnerable? Were there medications already in our formulary that could be effective? Were asymptomatic people able to pass the infection to others? These and other questions were answered either with a shrug of the shoulders or an unverified opinion.
From mid March forward, there were complexities piled upon complexities. What was wrong with testing? What labs should be testing? Who should be tested? Should the federal government take the lead, or was management of the pandemic the responsibility of state and local government? What was a greater priority, the health of individuals or the economy? What was the proper role of government?
Since COVID-19 was a new problem, there was much that we did not know. There were ambiguities piled on ambiguities. The CDC would make a recommendation, and then when new data was available, would modify their recommendation. The ambiguities created more uncertainty in the minds of the public. Who was a reliable source of information? Should we follow the direction of Dr. Fauci or the president? It was a new disease that we did not understand. The mixed messages that were based on opinions more than facts because of the ambiguities that existed created a greater sense of volatility, uncertainty, and enhanced the sense of complexity as new derivative problems emerged with the economy. One was left to wonder if suggestions were based more on strategies to save the economy or to save lives.
Currently we worry not only about our personal chances for infection and possible death, but we also wonder how it will end, and what will eventually happen to individuals and the economy if another rescue package is not passed by Congress. There are concerns about the impact of online learning on children. We wonder whether children might return from a day at school and infect their parents or grandparents. What are the risks for older teachers? Managing these concerns is especially problematic with the ambiguities and complexities introduced by the uncertainties about whether the fall will bring a “second wave.”
One particularly disconcerting problem has been the rapid spread of COVID-19 on college campuses as students return for classes and begin the year with parties. My alma mater which has a lovely campus in the center of Columbia, South Carolina had 26 students who tested positive when initially evaluated on their return to class. The University of South Carolina is using all of the latest technologies to screen for infections including waste water testing.
USC’s historic and lovely central quadrangle is pictured in today’s header. I spent many hours sitting on the grass and reading under its ancient trees. South Carolina has always been known as a “party school.” After a few parties, especially one large “pool party” there were over a thousand students who tested positive for COVID infection. South Carolina is not alone. Similar experiences have occurred at multiple colleges in the South, and in other parts of the country.
We are reminded that the parts of the brain that control judgement and impulse regulation are not completely developed until the late twenties, and that alcohol undermines judgement. There may be more rationale to returning my six year old grandson to first grade than sending an eighteen year old freshman off to college, but then that is opinion and not fact. All of the difficulties of VUCA are enhanced by the biases that make the opinions that drive our responses in a VUCA environment of ambiguity self serving rather than fact based.
How much of what we hear and see is driven by politics? Are the president’s claims of a vaccine by November 1 driven more by his desire to be reelected, or is there a possibility that we will soon be offered a vaccine that has been properly evaluated. If there is a vaccine that is offered, will enough people believe that it is safe and accept it to make a difference in the continuing spread that makes resumption of “normal life” safe and plausible. In a VUCA world the confluence of volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity undermines trust in any leader who discounts honesty as part of his/her managerial profile.
The concepts presented by the structure for thinking that VUCA offers do help us see the interconnectedness and the resultant complexities of a VUCA world, but we need it to do more. We need it to be the basis for strategies that help us respond to the volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity that our problem set drives because without a strategic approach that creates confidence we have heightened anxiety and fear which can drive irrational behavior and poor choices.
The original papers describing management in a VUCA world suggested that leaders should stove to balance the volatility with reminders of the vision created by the goals of the enterprise. Uncertainty was thought best managed by a search for understanding, and there was an emphasis on the importance of appropriate data. Complexity could be countered by clarity. We were advised that ambiguity could be counted with agility. I never resonated with agility countering ambiguity, and quickly replaced agility with action.
If you think about the impact of ambiguity, one of two things happens when you do not know what to do. Many people are frozen by the lack of information and adopt a “wait and see” posture which never made any sense to me, especially after I was exposed to the strategic processes that are part of Lean thinking. The other option is to make a move after formulating a hypothesis that you can test. Any time you do a controlled experiment, something is “learned.” To do an experiment is to take action. Those who “wait and see” are often “roadkill” in a fast moving world, or they miss the opportunity to act effectively. With that reasoning, I replaced agility in the VUCA response matrix with action.
For several years now I have always followed a description of the VUCA world that is volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous with the recommendation that a strategic plan be created that relies on the vision of the enterprise, the understanding of the environment, the clarity about principles and policy, and action that seeks to reduce ambiguity. It’s formulaic, but it gives some structure to the search for solution. As I was writing this post I was delighted to discover a new and improved VUCA response offered by Bill George the former CEO of Medtronics who is a lifelong student of leadership who has always espoused searching for the “True North.” George now teaches at Harvard Business School. His article is entitled “VUCA 2.0: A Strategy For Steady Leadership In An Unsteady World” and was published in Forbes magazine in February 2017. George was writing for business leaders in a world worried about Brexit and other things that have faded from our attention as COVID-19 has taken the stage, but the adviced is transferable. After a stage setting introduction that refers to the challenges that faced managers in 2017, he writes:
Now is the time for authentic business leaders to step forward and lead in ways that business schools don’t teach. Let’s examine the different ways of leading comprising VUCA 2.0:
Vision – Today’s business leaders need the ability to see through the chaos to have a clear vision for their organizations. They must define the True North of their organization: its mission, values, and strategy. They should create clarity around this True North and refuse to let external events pull them off course or cause them to neglect or abandon their mission, which must be their guiding light.
I would suggest that our “true north” is defined by the Triple Aim. To achieve the Triple Aim we must attend to achieving universal access to care, reducing healthcare disparities, eliminating racial inequities in healthcare, and reorienting our objectives to include a greater focus on the concerns of the individual patient and the community. Covid has taught us that our true north must include a greater emphasis on public health.
Understanding – With their vision in hand, leaders need in-depth understanding of their organization’s capabilities and strategies to take advantage of rapidly changing circumstances by playing to their strengths while minimizing their weaknesses. Listening only to information sources and opinions that reinforce their own views carries great risk of missing alternate points of view. Instead, leaders need to tap into myriad sources covering the full spectrum of viewpoints by engaging directly with their customers and employees to ensure they are attuned to changes in their markets. Spending time in the marketplace, retail stores, factories, innovation centers, and research labs, or just wandering around offices talking to people is essential.
“Understanding” requires getting outside of ourselves. In Lean thinking we talk about “going to the Gemba.” The Gemba is defined as where things are happening. In healthcare it means going into the clinic, into the hospital, and into the community looking for what the real problems and concerns must be beyond the concerns of how our institutions will fare if resources are reduced. It also means that we must try to talk to the people who see the problems through a different lens. There must eventually be a bipartisan acceptance for any solution that will have durability when the control of government changes from one party to another.
Courage – Now more than ever, leaders need the courage to step up to these challenges and make audacious decisions that embody risks and often go ula. against the grain. They cannot afford to keep their heads down, using traditional management techniques while avoiding criticism and risk-taking. In fact, their greatest risk lies in not having the courage to make bold moves. This era belongs to the bold, not the meek and timid.
Wow! That is a major modification from the original formula! There has been a lot of courage in healthcare recently. It has been demonstrated by the providers who have worked without adequate PPE, and over the exhausting extra hours required to cover the inadequacies of our preparation for a challenge like COVID. What we need now is a medical leadership class that has the courage to put safety, equity, patient centeredness, preparations for timely responses, and a pursuit of efficiency and effectiveness in the care of every individual and the whole population ahead of personal and institutional interests, often against the will of the collective status quo.
Adaptability – If ever there were a need for leaders to be flexible in adapting to this rapidly changing environment, this is it. Long-range plans are often obsolete by the time they are approved. Instead, flexible tactics are required for rapid adaptation to changing external circumstances, without altering strategic course. This is not a time for continuing the financial engineering so prevalent in the past decade. Rather, leaders need multiple contingency plans while preserving strong balance sheets to cope with unforeseen events.
With the challenges of COVID we have seen great adaptability. Adaptability does require a working hypothesis and a willingness to test the hypothesis while hoping that our hypothesis will lead to improvement. Perhaps it has been the adaptability of the medical community, and not the leadership and insights of the president that have limited the lives lost to 190,000 so far. We could have lost more. We have learned, and we have adapted. But, we are a work in progress. We have not yet adapted to all that COVID has demonstrated that needs changing. We must not forget that much of what has been done has been achieved without effective presidential leadership. In the Atul Gawande article that I reviewed last Friday I quoted him as saying:
President Trump, backed by the Republican politicians who have protected him, is clearly uninterested in pursuing such goals. But even the most committed Administration would have struggled to overcome the effects of the long, collective neglect of our public-health systems.
Substitute political and healthcare leadership for “business leaders” in the next statement from George.
With external volatility the prevalent characteristic these days, business leaders who stay focused on their mission and values and have the courage to deploy bold strategies building on their strengths will be the winners. Those who abandon core values or lock themselves into fixed positions and fail to adapt will wind up the losers.
It is ironic that a president who likes to talk about “losers” and “suckers” wants to make “suckers” of us all as he is leading us toward an even greater disaster from healthcare inequities and from unchecked global warming. What we face if he is given a second term is further erosion of our representative democracy, and any hope for The Triple Aim. What we will endure if he succeeds in hanging on to his office against what will surely be the will of a majority is a continuing world of MAGA VUCA. “Like we have never known.” Buckle your seat belts, and get ready for a turbulent ride. There are at least eight weeks of uncertainty ahead.
