In our quest to design effective organizations, we often fall back on conventional structures and systems. But here's a provocative thought: What if our standard approaches are fundamentally inadequate for the challenges we face today? Let's consider Conway's Law, which observes that organizations design systems that mirror their communication structures. It's a reflection of a deeper truth – we are often limited by our existing frameworks and mindsets. The Reverse Conway Manoeuvre challenges us to flip this concept: design your organization based on the outcomes you desire, not the other way around. But here's the catch – can we truly achieve transformational change by merely rearranging the pieces of our organizational puzzle? Is it enough to change structures without addressing the underlying cultural and systemic issues? This is not just a question of structural redesign; it's a fundamental challenge to the very way we think about organizational design. Our traditional methods may be grossly inadequate in a world that demands agility, innovation, and a deep understanding of complex dynamics. It's time to ask ourselves: Are we just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic?

@asrsupporter @skskskakskakak Potrebbe anche farne 5 Abraham. Perché lo sappiamo tutti che potrebbe succedere

An interesting under estimated potential of LLMs and reasoning models is that they can make us much more thoughtful in many many contexts / conversations

Love when an AI says "feels"

@mikeboysen @Boundaryless_ I would love to have a chat and compare notes Mike - I'm following you now: if you like drop a DM

Hi Mike, thanks for chiming in; what picture are you referring to? We are presenting more of a challenge here than a "solution" - we believe existing approaches have limitations in representing the complex system of interactions in a multi-customer/partner ecosystem and linking it back to product portfolio and org structure/capabilities, which I what we're trying to do with the upcoming Portfolio Map. Returning to your question on JTBD, we have taken some steps and are considering integrating Strategyn's version (which I believe is the same one you adopted). We don't have a critique re ODI/JTBD; we think these are viable tools to adopt, especially if you focus on one entity (you'll see we have a piece mentioned in the article that mentions that). The only issue I can talk about is that we - at the moment - see it challenging to map complex ecosystem interactions with Service Blueprints / Customer Journey Maps, which are pretty linear. I would be happy to look into your work if there's an open resource we can peek into

RT @MichaelAArouet: Europeans watching DeepSeek overtake ChatGPT on Apple App Store

capital and bureaucracy

“abstract knowledge (primarily but not only scientific knowledge) is in the process of becoming nothing less than the main force of production and will soon relegate the repetitious and segmented assembly of the production-line to a residual position”

@normonics I'm so fond of when my son was 1-2 so nostalgic. (also *boring* is the least resonant attribute I'd use for that period 😅)

RT @owocki: I am doing some research for @HowToDAObook launch about 2025 era DAO designs. Here are some trends. What did I miss? - Role…

Ma Bernardeschi è diventato Bryan Johnson?

To perform well in the current context (volatile, competitive, niche-based), organizations need to understand profoundly and align a few essential pieces: 1. The emerging needs of an ecosystem of customers and partners 2. The Go-To-Market motions they adopt to reach them 3. The products they build and how they connect 4. The underlying organizational capabilities This alignment can be achieved with surprisingly simple and common-sense measures. A. Enhancing the "domain consistency" in the organization - essentially grouping coherent elements of the portfolio around bounded shared contexts rather than requiring resources to come at long across the whole organization to function well; B. Increasing the alignment in terms of maturity: for example, by avoiding serving a mature customer need with a high-touch sales process that costs so much effort to make the product itself nonsustainable; C. Third, by aligning incentives and ensuring capital and resources are spent and managed wisely and in a customer-centric manner, ensuring that autonomy goes together with accountability using clear win-win contracts, and Profit & Loss boundaries; D. Reducing the complexity in the product portfolio by seeking common classes and types to facilitate product composability and lifecycle management E. Finally, identifying and nurturing differentiating capabilities while reducing and avoiding duplications in common services and the money and energy they spend on non-differentiating elements in the portfolio. (you'll forgive me for not using Emoji; an AI didn't write this post)

Trovo veramente odioso che @VodafoneIT lasci puntualmente scadere gli sconti e aumentare le fatture invece che chiamarti prima per proporti nuovi vincoli. Chiaramente una pratica commerciale borderline che mira a fare quattro soldi sperando che i clientei non si accorgano degli aumenti.

@jgreenhall @crdrOak I assume this can happen around these key system, more than capital allocation (needed mainly functional to get processes started) I'm worried of actual skills and capabilities development, shared platforms can help maybe

RT @meedabyte: @jgreenhall @crdrOak I think we're left with radically self organizing around civic economies of fundamentals (energy, food,…

@jgreenhall @crdrOak I think we're left with radically self organizing around civic economies of fundamentals (energy, food, welfare...)

RT @kimmonismus: AI outperformed doctors on reasoning tasks. Doctor = 30% correct diagnosis AI = 80% correct diagnosis This is such an…

RT @jafurtado: Growth Models as Strategic Frameworks in Multi-Product Companies, By Simone Cicero (@meedabyte) and Luca Ruggeri (@L_Ruggeri…

This has been long coming

È stato un confronto davvero stimolante quello con @matteoroversi nel #podcast #WorkAfter di Cosmico. Abbiamo esplorato la necessità di superare i vecchi modelli top-down, puntando verso organizzazioni più aperte, capaci di favorire autonomia e imprenditorialità. Le domande incisive di Matteo ci hanno spinto a esplorare e spiegare le ragioni profonde e strategiche di questa trasformazione, legate ai rapidi cambiamenti del mercato, della società e della tecnologia. Credo che questa conversazione offra un punto di partenza chiaro e accessibile per chi vuole orientarsi in questi temi chiave. Abbiamo parlato (come esimersi 🙃) anche di hashtag#AI generativa, di nuove forme di educazione e di culture del lavoro in continua evoluzione: insomma, un’occasione per comprendere meglio il contesto in cui si muovono le imprese di oggi. Che ne pensate di queste idee? Sono domande e conversazioni che fate già nelle vostre organizzazioni o temete che nei vostri contesti si stia rimanendo "indietro" su questi temi? Mi piacerebbe discuterne con voi nei commenti e, se questa conversazione vi è sembrata utile, vi invito a condividerla con la vostra rete, se non altro per dare visibilità a questo nuovo progetto di podcast e offrire spunti interessanti anche ad altri!