Complexity and evolution
Management in many Scandinavian companies has moved from a stable Taylorist foundation to full-blown change management. However, several large Danish companies are still stuck in a hopelessly hierarchical paradigm.
Our interconnectedness interferes with the network of networks. Therefore, it’s impossible to create and follow a strategy to the letter without adapting it to the conditions it encounters as we go along. The military can strategize all they want, but when they meet the enemy on the front lines, they must be constantly responsive.
Scrum is a brilliant tool for responding to change, which I’ll come back to. Stacey expresses that it’s impossible to “figure it out”. We live in constant interactions with each other and need to “embrace complexity”. Only when we can move through the constant complexity will we achieve robust change. If we can’t, we need a “dictator”/leader to take charge to alleviate our individual pressures.
Of course, complexity has implications for my leadership.

1. I must expand the understanding of leadership from the actions of individuals to the innovative, contextual interactions across the entire social system.
2. I examine what micro-strategic leadership actions need to be taken across all organizational levels and boundaries?
3. the results of my leadership will therefore be based on complex, constructivist interactions between people.
4. I create the foundation for change in new organizational fields through relationships. Therefore, my leadership happens in the “in-between”.
5. My leadership must build a solid and vital foundation for collective action.
6. innovative methods will enrich my leadership of complex environments.
   When we cannot plan the future in detail, we must explore exploratively in the present by evaluating the past.

The agile and responsive manifesto
The way we were leaders 100 years ago doesn’t work today. Yet this mindset is still embedded in many leaders as the form of leadership they resort to when the going gets tough. But the world in which this leadership mindset originated no longer exists. We need to create an entirely new system that coordinates in different ways to unleash innovation. That’s why a group of software developers sat down and wrote the Agile Manifesto 20 years ago. Last year, the Responsive Manifesto was released. The illustration on the right shows with sliders the balance points that are important in these manifestos. On the left is Taylor’s paradigm. To the right is agile.
We move from a world of order through a complicated world to a complex and chaotic world (see illustration on the right), from a predictable, linear world to an unpredictable world. A responsive organization has a change muscle that can react and adapt to external and internal factors. This type of organization sees the power of self-organizing on principles of empowering and distributed power, based on emergent challenges rather than control. It creates greater meaning and flexibility for employees.
Responsive organizations also take into account the whole person, including emotions. It is holistic leadership, which I will mention several times in the paper.
“Responsive Organizations are built to learn and respond rapidly through the open flow of information; encouraging experimentation and learning on rapid cycles; and organizing as a network of employees, customers, and partners motivated by shared purpose. “
Appelbaum says agile methods enable:

• More effective planning and workflow management
• Greater visibility across the organization using visual management tools
• Greater alignment of team activities with organizational strategy
• Increased ability to respond to market changes through shorter planning cycles
• Proactive, rather than reactive, solution development
• Better ability to predict and respond to market disruptions
• Increased organizational stability/sustainability through self-sustaining teams