steelcase blog

Simple or Complex…

… it seems like a fairly straight-forward choice; whether describing a person, a product, a process, or a place.  All that changed after spending time at the Santa Fe Institute (ground zero for a lot of complexity thinkers) and then reading the book Simplexity by Jeffrey Kluger, senior editor for Time magazine).  I now see these two descriptions in a totally new and entirely different light.  Kluger’s book is not a long book and fairly large print (I like that), but it is filled with such rich content that it is not a book you can read super fast.  It’s one of those books you read a paragraph or page, and then reread again to make sure you took it all in.  The basic premise of the book is that the two, simple and complex, are much more linked than one might imagine.  But not like two sides of the same coin where it is heads-tails, one or the other.  It is more like the boiling of water in a stove, eventually converting to steam,… moving from one condition/phase that is relatively stable (water - simple), to one that is more random and thus unstable (steam - also simple).  And complexity reigns in the middle (the complexity arc, like a bell curve).

I know this is a rather simplistic (no pun intended) view of the relationship between simple and complex,... but it helps me understand how our instincts, or first impressions, may often be wrong.  Why that which we label as complex, like the spread of a disease, can actually be resolved in a very simple way.  And that which seems on the surface to be so simple, like a handshake, is actually a very complex gesture.  The author explores this new science of complexity by asking a series of questions, each highlighting for the reader where their preconceived notions may be wrong.  What’s most interesting is when Kruger describes how introducing ‘confusion’ moves one up the complexity arc, and correspondingly how introducing ‘order’ or purposeful ‘disorder’ (as a response to predictable patterns) can reduce complexity.  The book quotes Gell-Mann, who cofounded the Santa Fe Institute, “It’s the region between order (pure robustness) and disorder (pure chaos) that gives you complexity, not the order and disorder at the ends.”

So what does this have to do with office furniture…?  It just so happens a lot.  I’ve referenced before that we have developed a model to develop the ‘sweet spot’ for innovation,… where three converging need sets overlap – social, spatial and informational (SSI).  To the extent we design solutions that respond to all three, we create resonance with users.  The discovery of ‘patterns’ is instrumental to this process, as described in Kruger’s book.  It is the knowledge of patterns, and effective responses to same, which reduces complexity.  Take collaboration for example; it is a very complex process.  Here you have different people, many from different departments, each with different experiences and often hidden agendas.  Plus you have an objective that may or may not be all that clear.  And a team setting that more than likely hinders easy information sharing/comparing of ideas.  There are issues of trust, social protocols engagement; issues of ergonomics, light, sound, comfort; and issues of access to power/network and display of content, digital or analog, the making of models.  No wonder it is so hard to do, and do well.

But there are ‘patterns’ of interaction and use that we have consistently observed over the years,… and for which solutions can be designed.  Solutions which increase chaos when desired, or engineer robustness as needed, to achieve a simpler (more effective) group/team interaction.  One such example is to have the shape of the room and the furniture within designed to keep the focus of the participants on each other.  This is done by eliminating the ‘front’ of the room, and the sense of a ‘head of the table,’… creating a more democratic co-ownership to what is being authored.  Another example is to provide tools that make everyone’s thinking visible (a large digital display and/or white board), and by so doing eliminate the guesswork out of where the differences truly exist.  Collaboration complexity increases the more isolated and divergent the thinking of each individual participant is.  Solving for ‘patterns’ of interaction make for a less complex, and much more productive output.  Take a look at the many alternatives you have for group work today (both inside and outside the office), and assess if it helps or hinders your ability to contribute.  Simple or Complex…?

Service is Dead…

… OK, that may be a little harsh,… but certainly service, in the way I define it, is dying. And how do I define it…? Service is doing something for someone else, or someone else doing something for you. I’m not limiting my comments to just for-fee services, though the transaction of money tends to heighten one’s assessment of their satisfaction in the end. To me, many of those individuals which provide services for others just don’t seem to care anymore, or at least it doesn’t appear they care as much as those that preceded them. Which has me wondering,… is it that they just really don’t care about doing their best, or is it something else that is keeping them from performing at their best when providing a service…?

Maybe some examples will help. Why is it that when drinks, hot or cold, are passed to you at a drive-up window, they either don’t have the lids on tight or worse yet have liquid bubbling out the top or dripping down the sides…?!? It could be they just don’t see it,… but I think they see it, and simply just don’t care. But for sure they have, at some time, been on the receiving end of such service in their personal lives; so they must know it’s not a great experience. It’s as if the transaction is happening blindly in front of them. Some go so far as to acknowledge, “Sorry, the cup is a little full.” But then why didn’t they take the time to resolve the problem before handing you the dripping cup,… that is now running down your hand, onto your shirt sleeve and into your cup holder in your car…?

It’s not just drinks at drive-up windows. It’s the electronic lock that is left on the shirt you just bought, and don’t notice till you are all the way home; it’s the cab driver that acts like you don’t know he’s taking you the long route; it’s the car dealer that is working on your catalytic converter and deactivates your stereo in the process; there are hundreds of examples. Some may think I’m being overly critical, but there are surveys (one in a recent book I read called What’s the Secret? by John R. DiJulius III) that clearly show that service, in terms of customer satisfaction, is decreasing. The author states that only 3 percent of all companies are operating at customer service levels that would be considered ‘world class’,… and 41 percent are operating at levels their customers would rank as ‘below average’ or ‘unacceptable’ in terms of their service experience. Those are frightening stats, and they seem to be slipping.

Again, maybe the reason is that these companies and the persons that work at them are managed in ways that make it difficult to care (e.g., instructed to move customers along as quickly as possible),… or if caring adds to cost, they understand that cost rules. I’m sure they are ‘not’ told to ignore the customer, or to forget about quality. But likewise, they are probably not told that their role is, above all else, to make the customer’s experience a memorable one. It can happen, it’s not an impossible objective,… it merely takes attention to the customer, their specific needs/desires, and focusing on the details to pull it off. I say we need a resurgence of customer service, starting with a caring attitude. And if we do, our businesses will surge and profits will follow. Do you care…?