Complex Adaptive System
In today’s Complex Adaptive Systems work environment particularly in safety, which according to Ivan Pupulidy, PhD Crista Vesel, MSc(2023, p.52), are characterized by parts that are interactive, interconnected, diverse, and adaptive present problems which by their very nature are not like puzzles with definitive solutions. The system, according to the authors, is also made up of human agents that can process and make sense of information and have the capacity to modify their behavior based on the knowledge they have and what they learn in the moment. Causality in this system is not consistent. Cause if it exists, is an interaction between various conditions and influences. It is the relationship between them that creates and increases their complexity.
Due to these characteristics, solving issues requires a deeper experiential understanding; it requires context. Problems in this system arise from non-linear and often conflicting demands and uncertainty. For instance, think about the never-ending discourse around “Safety” and “Production” which are not problems to be eliminated or argued over which comes first. Rather these are paradoxes that need to be understood and navigated.
Managing Paradoxes
According to Esther Perel on the Trevor Noah Pod Cast, Now What?, (1:49:16), “Complex problems do not get solved; they are paradoxes that need to be managed”. Due to our need for certainty, we tend to rely on traditional linear problem-solving methods seeking to find a definite cause for an event. However, these methods are not equipped to handle such complexities that are inherent in today’s Complex Adaptive Systems. There are so many factors and nuances that cannot be understood through linear approaches. When these methods are applied in the search for answers, they often lead to superficial fixes, repeated failures, and the never-ending blame cycle.
Complex System requires information and context to understand the multiple influences and nuances that played a part or influenced the cause of an event. It is not about choosing one path over another (“either/or”), but it is about understanding and managing coexisting, often conflicting demands (“both/and”). This is crucial because these paradoxes cannot be eliminated but must be managed and navigated continuously. These paradoxes demand the ability to hold contradictory truths simultaneously; something storytelling excels at. Storytelling has the capacity to integrate and explain the “work-as-imagined” (procedures, engineering plans) with the “work-as-done” (reality on the ground, pressures, innovation, improvisation). An understanding which is critically needed for learning within a complex system.
Let us take this story as a practical example.
From Pressure to Progress: A manufacturing journey navigating the Paradox of safety and production.
At the manufacturing plant, a constant tension existed between the safety rule for fully locking out the critical assembly machine for cleaning or maintenance, and the intense pressure to keep production flowing. Despite strict memos and training, operators continued to perform what they termed “quick clears” without a full lockout, leading to recurring near-misses. This introduced a paradox that linear solutions couldn’t fix without blaming or punishing individuals.
The manager called a meeting to discuss this persistent issue for a better understanding. An operator shared her authentic story, explaining that under tight deadlines, operators created their own shortcuts (improvisation and innovation) to keep production going, a “work-as-done” reality not reflected in official procedures. “When the machine needs a quick clear or when a jam happens and we get a truck leaving in 20 minutes,” she narrated, “if we do a full lockout, that’s half an hour gone and that puts everyone behind schedule”. So, they figured out how to be fast (through improvisation and innovation), calling these methods “quick clears” using a long pole, or just reaching in for a second after hitting the stop button. She described the tension, the quick calculations, and the silent understanding among operators that “that’s just how you do it to keep the line moving.” Her narrative revealed that the issue wasn’t a lack of knowledge, but an unmanaged conflict between safety and production demands.
Her raw and authentic story, shared in a culture where psychological confidence had been ingrained, truly transformed the organization’s understanding. This “psychological confidence”, a term coined by Simon Bownis when “a person’s belief that they will not be punished or ridiculed for speaking up with ideas, questions, concerns, or mistakes (Pupulidy & Vesel, 2023, p.81) was the bedrock that allowed the truth of the “work-as-done” to surface. The leadership realized they couldn’t “solve” the paradox of safety versus production by simply eliminating production pressure. Instead, they began to manage it.
They acknowledged the inherent need for speed and efficiency, and rather than just enforcing rules, they collaborated deeply with operators and engineers. This collaboration led to tangible changes: they redesigned sections of the machine for safer, faster “quick-clear” access without requiring a full LOTO for minor jams, incorporating specific, engineered safeguards. They also adjusted production schedules slightly, building buffer time to reduce the intense, real-time pressure on operators.
This approach, birthed from the operator’s authentic narrative, allowed the organization to hold the contradictory truths of safety and production simultaneously, fostering a capacity for collective sensemaking, enabling them to navigate complexity, understand inherent paradoxes, and continue to adapt effectively. It transformed a recurring near-miss problem into a profound organizational learning experience, ultimately enhancing both safety and efficiency.
The Power of Storytelling
This story perfectly illustrates how storytelling bridges these two realities. It doesn’t dismiss either but enables an organization to understand the dynamic relationship between them. This understanding leads to fostering a more nuanced and adaptive approach to risk. By embracing and creating a safe environment for authentic storytelling, organizations stop the vicious cycle of trying to solve complex problems with linear approaches, but rather cultivate a capacity for collective sensemaking, enabling them to navigate complexity, understand inherent paradoxes, and continue to adapt. Storytelling then becomes the vehicle for organizational learning for the ongoing complex challenge.
Sources
Pupulidy, I., & Vesel, C. (2023). Human & organization potential. Dynamic Inquiry LLC.
Perel, E. (Guest). (2025, May 28). Meet Esther Perel – One of my favorite people. [Audio podcast episode]. In What Now? with Trevor Noah. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/meet-esther-perel-one-of-my-favorite-people/id1710609544?i=1000710380202
