December 6, 2009

Size Disadvantage?

Posted in Life tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , at 4:09 pm by lindaslongview

It’s easy to benchmark size when rating performance – it is visible and typically easy to measure.  Yet other less accessible attributes can contribute importantly to success:  agility, competence, experience, focus, knowledge, patience, skill, strategy, etc.  Because these other attributes are less visible and are harder to assess, we often choose to measure on the basis of a simple benchmark like size.

In June, I got agitated about “how much playing time?” my son received at a tournament (see Applied to Soccer).  Although my long view leadership advice in that post has merit, I now realize that on a systemic basis, I oversimplified my son’s soccer situation.  There was more to learn and assess…

In the case of sports, bigger players benefit from their size on two counts:  1) they are physically more powerful and 2) youth coaches often select larger players over their smaller teammates on the reasoning “you cannot coach size,” and give them more opportunity early (for example, more playing time on game day).

However, having more diligently watched the dynamics of my son’s development as a soccer player a few more months, I now realize that being small (for a longer duration) is only a near-term disadvantage in terms of opportunity (passed over for the boys who have grown bigger earlier).  In subtle ways, smaller boys, like my son, benefit from their size disadvantage over the long-term because they cultivate their game differently.  For example, my son has impressive knowledge of the tactics and strategy of the game.  His skill, agility, and speed are his primary tools for success (different emphasis than his larger teammates).  When he finally achieves improved size parity within the next few years (he has more growth left than those who have grown early), perhaps like Lionel Messi, he will still be reasonably competitive due to his quiet mastery of the less visible attributes of the game?!

Today’s observation is simply a personal reminder to engage in long-view thinking everywhere when learning:

  • Expand observations,
  • Increase knowledge, and
  • Cultivate more complex thinking for improved accuracy (include more attributes in mental models).

As a result of my agitation, I paid greater attention to the team dynamics, learned much, and now realize that it is all part of the beautiful game.

Nevertheless, I wish my son increased joy (and playing time) as he auditions for a different team in a slightly less competitive league. 🙂

Are you constantly expanding observations, increasing knowledge, and cultivating more complex thinking everywhere?

March 14, 2009


Posted in Uncategorized tagged , , , , , , , , , , at 12:49 am by lindaslongview

As a veteran of understanding complex systems, it is not terribly surprising that sometimes the unexpected occurs. It is not so much that humans have poor intuition, it is more that we 1) oversimplify (we focus on a specific element and not the whole), 2) we underestimate the affect of randomness, 3) we do not account for a changes in underlying assumptions of our mental models, and 4) we overvalue the expected outcomes because we become emotionally attached to the outcome.

As a trivial example of the unexpected, I am whining about my sore hands after having returned to running and climbing after a month of ankle injury hiatus (the climbing calluses on my hands receded and my hands became soft). So even though I expected to be most challenged by my ankle, it is actually my hands that are unexpectedly sore — I did not anticipate the whole picture.

As a really BIG example of the unexpected, the core of the financial mess that the world is currently experiencing can be traced to an oversimplified quantitative model that failed to account for changes in market assumptions – see Wired (March 2009): “A Formula for Disaster.” (Very interesting yet short article).

My experience in managing complex systems coincides with all of the wisdom and experience of others before me — take the long view: pay attention to the capacity constraint of the system, be wary of process steps with similar capacity to the constraint either upstream or downstream (they could easily become the constraint), and stay aware of external factors that can impact the system. The most important advice is to assume that Murphy exists and plan for managing it. To that end, if you do not have good intuition under different scenarios and want to build it to plan for it (for example, recovery from disruption), I recommend discrete event simulation with Simul8.

I am sure that there are other reasons than the four (4) I listed for the unexpected to occur. I invite you to add reasons 5, 6, 7….