Accidental Adversaries

Last updated

Accidental Adversaries is one of the ten system archetypes used in system dynamics modelling, or systems thinking. This archetype describes the degenerative pattern that develops when two subjects cooperating for a common goal, accidentally take actions that undermine each other's success. It is similar to the escalation system archetype in terms of pattern behaviour that develops over time. [1]

Contents

Archetype description

The archetype describes a pattern where two subjects have decided to work together because they will benefit from the alliance. [2] Each take actions believing that it will bring benefit to the other and if the cooperation works, they will both benefit from it. Problems start arising when one or both of the subjects need to fix a local gap in performance, maybe due to external pressure. They initiate action to fix the gap and accidentally undermine each other's success. The result of these activities may produce a sense of resentment or frustration between the subjects or it may even turn the subjects into adversaries (hence the archetype name), thereby destroying the alliance.

History

The original set of system archetypes were published in The Fifth Discipline by Peter Senge. The exact source of these generic structures is not known. However "Accidental Adversaries" has a clear origin. It is derived from observations made by Jennifer Kemeny, a colleague of Senge's and a contributor to the original archetype descriptions. In her consulting work in the late 1980s she was intrigued at how often potential strategic alliances were unsuccessful, or devolved into outright hostility. Such a recurring phenomenon suggested a structural cause. The essential elements of the archetype were first described during a session Kemeny facilitated. It was the first meeting of the first ever alliance between Walmart and Procter and Gamble. Employees diagrammed how their protective business policies caused unintentional damage to the other company – which responded with similarly defensive actions. The net effect of these "back and forth" behaviors was lower profit and less goodwill – which for a long period of time had overshadowed the possibility of mutual benefit between the organizations. An early description of "Accidental Adversaries" is in The Fifth Discipline: Fieldbook, by Senge, et al.

Description of the model

By way of example, two parties A and B have realised that by uniting forces, they can increase their success, whatever that may be. At a certain point in time, say B, takes corrective actions in order to counteract a decrease in performance due to external pressure. Although B's actions are important for B, their impact on A are not understood or not considered. The result is that now A feels that he is being betrayed and reacts to diminish the negative effects of B's actions. Ironically, A's new actions now obstruct B's success. If this situation persists and the results worsen, the alliance breaks down. A vicious circle is created and each partner has now even forgotten the original purpose of the alliance. A and B's actions now only focus on counteracting the hostile actions taken by the other. A and B thus 'accidentally' become adversaries. [3]

Causal Loop diagram

The causal loop diagram in Figure 1 shows the pattern dynamics of the system. [4]

Figure 1. Causal loop diagram Accidental Adversaries Causal Loop original.svg
Figure 1. Causal loop diagram

The pattern of behaviour begins with the outer reinforcing loop R1 where A and B have formed a synergistic alliance that benefits both. An action taken by A in favour of B increases B's success and vice versa. At some point in time, though, say B, initiates a series of corrective actions in order to adjust its performance. The actions taken increase performance, whose effects balance the number of corrective actions required. This results in the creation of a balancing loop, B2. These actions also unintentionally obstruct the other party's success, and result in the formation of the negative reinforcing loop R2 that undermines the virtuous reinforcing loop R1. Now each corrective action taken by B causes A to start taking corrective measures as well, thus activating its own balancing loop B1. The formation of R2 is the critical point at which the dynamics of the system go out of control, resembling the Escalation archetype.

Stock and flow diagram

Figure 2 shows the stock and flow diagram for this archetype.

Figure 2. Stock and Flow diagram Accidental Adversaries Stock and flow.svg
Figure 2. Stock and Flow diagram

Alternative model

An alternative form of the model is shown in Figure 3. The differences are in the two reinforcing loops R3 and R4. Here, A and B specifically take actions to improve their growth, not, as before, to adjust their performance to a pre-determined target. By seeking improvement through R3 and R4, A and B suppress the effects of R1 and establish the negative-effect reinforcing loop R2, that in turn, completely takes over B5 and B6. The two balancing loops B5 and B6 are formed by, respectively,

B's success->B's actions in A's favour->A's success->A's actions to improve A's success->A's unintended obstruction of B's success and
A's success->A's actions in B's favour->B's success->B's actions to improve B's success->B's unintended obstruction of A's success.

Figure 3. Alternative Causal Loop diagram Accidental Adversaries Causal Loop Alternative model.svg
Figure 3. Alternative Causal Loop diagram
.

Model behaviour

The archetype behaviour over time is shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4. Behaviour over time Accidental Adversaries TimeBehaviour.png
Figure 4. Behaviour over time


Both parties show a similar trend in direction and rate of change of success, with one trailing behind the other one due to system delays. Even though the pattern shows stable periods, the overall trend follows a downward direction. [2] The above simulation can be run from InsightMaker. [5]

Possible leverage points

It is possible to achieve leverage by introducing or re-emphasising a link between each party's success, [6] thus re-establishing the outer virtuous reinforcing loop shown in Figure 3. Kemeny proposes a list of seven action steps to deal with the unintended consequences of each party's actions, given their mental models: [7]

Example

A classic example of the Accidental Adversaries system archetype is that of Procter and Gamble supplying Wal-Mart. When Procter and Gamble's profits decline, they introduce promotions. This results in extra costs and decreasing profitability for Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart's responds by stocking-up – buying large quantities of products during the discount period – and then selling them at regular prices when promotions end, thereby increasing its margins. Procter and Gamble's production now faces great swings in volume because Wal-Mart does not need to order products for months, which adds to P and G's costs. To improve their situation, Procter and Gamble pushes even more on promotions, blaming at the same time Wal-Mart for their problems. Wal-Mart reacts by stocking-up even more. Eventually, Procter and Gamble finds itself putting a lot of effort into promotions, at the expense of new product development, while Wal-Mart concentrates solely on buying and storing promoted products rather than improving their operations. The situation is described by the causal loop diagram in Figure 5. In the Procter and Gamble/Wal-Mart case, leverage was achieved by bringing both parties together to understand the structure they had unintentionally created, even though each party 's action was completely rational and understandable from their local perspective. [7]

Related Research Articles

Feedback Process where information about current status is used to influence future status

Feedback occurs when outputs of a system are routed back as inputs as part of a chain of cause-and-effect that forms a circuit or loop. The system can then be said to feed back into itself. The notion of cause-and-effect has to be handled carefully when applied to feedback systems:

Simple causal reasoning about a feedback system is difficult because the first system influences the second and second system influences the first, leading to a circular argument. This makes reasoning based upon cause and effect tricky, and it is necessary to analyze the system as a whole.

Walmart American multinational retail chain

Walmart Inc. is an American multinational retail corporation that operates a chain of hypermarkets, discount department stores, and grocery stores from the United States, headquartered in Bentonville, Arkansas. The company was founded by Sam Walton in nearby Rogers, Arkansas in 1962 and incorporated under Delaware General Corporation Law on October 31, 1969. It also owns and operates Sam's Club retail warehouses.

System dynamics Study of non-linear complex systems

System dynamics (SD) is an approach to understanding the nonlinear behaviour of complex systems over time using stocks, flows, internal feedback loops, table functions and time delays.

Action research Methodology for social science research

Action research is a philosophy and methodology of research generally applied in the social sciences. It seeks transformative change through the simultaneous process of taking action and doing research, which are linked together by critical reflection. Kurt Lewin, then a professor at MIT, first coined the term "action research" in 1944. In his 1946 paper "Action Research and Minority Problems" he described action research as "a comparative research on the conditions and effects of various forms of social action and research leading to social action" that uses "a spiral of steps, each of which is composed of a circle of planning, action and fact-finding about the result of the action".

Peter Senge American systems scientist (born 1947)

Peter Michael Senge is an American systems scientist who is a senior lecturer at the MIT Sloan School of Management, co-faculty at the New England Complex Systems Institute, and the founder of the Society for Organizational Learning. He is known as the author of the book The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization.

In business management, a learning organization is a company that facilitates the learning of its members and continuously transforms itself. The concept was coined through the work and research of Peter Senge and his colleagues.

Causal loop diagram Causal diagram that aids in visualizing how different variables in a system are interrelated

A causal loop diagram (CLD) is a causal diagram that aids in visualizing how different variables in a system are causally interrelated. The diagram consists of a set of words and arrows. Causal loop diagrams are accompanied by a narrative which describes the causally closed situation the CLD describes. Closed loops, or causal feedback loops, in the diagram are very important features of CLDs.

Bullwhip effect Form of distribution marketing

The bullwhip effect is a distribution channel phenomenon in which demand forecasts yield supply chain inefficiencies. It refers to increasing swings in inventory in response to shifts in consumer demand as one moves further up the supply chain. The concept first appeared in Jay Forrester's Industrial Dynamics (1961) and thus it is also known as the Forrester effect. It has been described as “the observed propensity for material orders to be more variable than demand signals and for this variability to increase the further upstream a company is in a supply chain”. Science at Stanford University helped incorporate the concept into supply chain vernacular using a story about Volvo. Suffering a glut in green cars, sales and marketing developed a program to sell the excess inventory. While successful in generating the desired market pull, manufacturing did not know about the promotional plans. Instead, they read the increase in sales as an indication of growing demand for green cars and ramped up production.

Manifest and latent functions and dysfunctions

Manifest and latent functions are social scientific concepts created by anthropologist, Bronislaw Malinowski in 1923 while studying the Trobiand Islanders in the Western Pacific. It was later modified for sociology by Robert K. Merton. Merton appeared interested in sharpening the conceptual tools to be employed in a functional analysis.

Leverage-point modeling (LPM) is a demonstrated approach for improved planning and spending for operations and support (O&S) activities. LPM is a continuous-event simulation technique that uses the system dynamics approach of model building. Dr. Nathaniel Mass championed the potential of LPM, and adapted it for the Department of Defense (DoD) as a tool for jumping to a higher performance curve as a means of offsetting higher costs and declining budgets. The purpose of LPM is to test policies and investments that improve mission capability for a given level of investment or funding. It is particularly used to evaluate investments in component reliability and parts availability.

David Kantor was an American systems psychologist, organizational consultant, and clinical researcher. He is the founder of three research and training institutes, the author of numerous books and articles, and the inventor of a series of psychometric instruments that provide insight into individual and group behaviors. His groundbreaking empirical research revealed a fundamental structure to all communication, known as Structural Dynamics, which provides the solution to the most common communication challenges experienced in any human system. Kantor's Four Player Model has been referenced by hundreds of other theorists including Peter Senge in The Fifth Discipline, Bill Isaacs in Dialogue: The Art of Thinking Together, and Michael Jensen and Werner Erhard in their revolutionary leadership program: Being a Leader and the Effective Exercise of Leadership as Your Natural Self Expression. His work has made a significant contribution to both family systems therapy and organizational theory and practice.

System archetypes are patterns of behavior of a system. Systems expressed by circles of causality have therefore similar structure. Identifying a system archetype and finding the leverage enables efficient changes in a system. The basic system archetypes and possible solutions of the problems are mentioned in the section Examples of system archetypes. A fundamental property of nature is that no cause can affect the past. System archetypes do not imply that current causes affect past effects.

Fixes that fail is a system archetype that in system dynamics is used to describe and analyze a situation, where a fix effective in the short-term creates side effects for the long-term behaviour of the system and may result in the need of even more fixes. This archetype may be also known as fixes that backfire or corrective actions that fail. It resembles the Shifting the burden archetype.

Attractiveness Principle is one of System Dynamics archetypes. System archetypes describe common patterns of behavior in dynamic complex systems. Attractiveness principle is a variation of Limits to Growth archetype, with restrictions caused by multiple limits. The limiting factors here are each of different character and usually cannot be dealt with the same way and/or they cannot be all addressed.

The environmental sustainability problem has proven difficult to solve. The modern environmental movement has attempted to solve the problem in a large variety of ways. But little progress has been made, as shown by severe ecological footprint overshoot and lack of sufficient progress on the climate change problem. Something within the human system is preventing change to a sustainable mode of behavior. That system trait is systemic change resistance. Change resistance is also known as organizational resistance, barriers to change, or policy resistance.

Ingrid I. Rivera Rocafort is a marketing professional and the current Executive Director of the Puerto Rico Tourism Company. She has worked as a market analyst, strategic planner, and Director of such firms as Procter & Gamble, Wal-Mart, and Advent-Morro Equity Partners coordinating efforts in Puerto Rico and for Spanish-speaking markets throughout the Caribbean and United States. She also is a public speaker on topics related to travel and business.

Wonder Loom is a toy loom used to create colorful bracelets and charms by weaving rubber bands together into Brunnian links. It was designed in 2013 by Choon's Designs LLC of Wixom, Michigan and licensed to The Beadery Craft Products in Hope Valley, Rhode Island as the exclusive manufacturer.

Growth and underinvestment

The Growth and Underinvestment Archetype is one of the common system archetype patterns defined as part of the system dynamics discipline.

The escalation archetype is one of possible types of system behaviour that are known as system archetypes.

Family Movie Night was an umbrella series of made for TV films owned and sponsored by Procter & Gamble and Walmart. The companies were inserting product placements within the films. Flyover Studios, P&G Productions and Telenext Media Inc. were also involved producing the films. The films were aired via time buys and developed as back door pilots but none had gone to series.

References

  1. ↑ Senge, P. et al. (1994). The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook. New York: Doubleday Currency.
  2. 1 2 Braun B. (2002) The System Archetypes
  3. ↑ Accidental Adversaries Systems Archetype at SystemsWiki.org. "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 2011-09-20. Retrieved 2011-06-01.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  4. ↑ Accidental Adversaries at Systems-Thinking.org. http://www.systems-thinking.org/theWay/saa/aa.htm
  5. ↑ "Clone of Accidental Adversaries". Insight Maker. Retrieved 2017-10-23.
  6. ↑ Wolstenholme E. F. (2003) Towards the definition and use of a core set of archetypal structures in system dynamics Archived 2010-12-26 at the Wayback Machine
  7. 1 2 Kemeny J (1994) "Accidental Adversaries": When Friends Become Foes, The Systems Thinker, Vol. 5, No. 1

Further reading

Senge, Peter (1990). The Fifth Discipline. Currency. ISBN   0-385-26095-4.
Senge, P. et al. (1994). The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook. New York: Doubleday Currency.
Forrester, J. W. (1971, 1973). World Dynamics. Cambridge, MA: Wright Allen Press.
Forrester, Jay W. (1969). Urban Dynamics. Pegasus Communications. ISBN   1-883823-39-0.
Forrester, J. W. (1975). Collected Papers of Jay W. Forrester. Cambridge, MA: Wright-Allen Press.
Kim D, Kim C, A Pocket Guide to Using the Archetypes, Pegasus Communications, May 1994.
Ramsey P, Wells R, Managing the Archetypes: Accidental Adversaries, Pegasus Communications, 2001.
Kim D, Anderson V, Systems Archetype Basics: From Story to Structure, Pegasus Communications, 1998.

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.