Task C6.1: Review the Communication of Systems 3 and 4

What is Task C6.1?

Task C6.1 is part of the "Decide" phase in the Viability Canvas methodology, specifically within the "Create the Adaptive Space" step (Step C6). This task instructs you to "Look at the communications between Systems 3 and 4 (the external and internal eyes). For productive cooperation, they need to develop an intensive exchange and - through their respective points of view - a healthy conflict. Innovative, practical, and feasible solutions emerge from this exchange."

Purpose of Reviewing Communication Between Systems 3 and 4

The purpose of this task is to examine and improve the interaction between the organization's operational management (System 3) and its development/intelligence functions (System 4). This serves several important functions:

1. Creating productive tension: Ensuring that both current operations and future-focused perspectives are appropriately represented
2. Facilitating innovation: Generating creative solutions that are both innovative and practical
3. Balancing competing priorities: Managing the inherent tension between operational efficiency and strategic adaptation
4. Fostering organizational learning: Creating feedback loops between present operations and future planning
5. Developing realistic strategies: Ensuring that future plans are grounded in operational realities

By reviewing the communication between Systems 3 and 4, you create the conditions for a dynamic "adaptive space" where the organization can effectively balance stability and change.

Understanding Systems 3 and 4 Interaction

In the Viable System Model:

• System 3 (Inside and Now) focuses on operational management, optimization, and maintaining current performance. It represents the internal focus on making today's operations work effectively.
• System 4 (Outside and Then) focuses on the external environment, future trends, research, and development. It represents the future-oriented perspective concerned with adaptation and innovation.

These systems have inherently different perspectives and priorities, which can create tension. However, this tension is productive when properly managed, as it ensures the organization balances current operational needs with future adaptation.

How to Complete Task C6.1

To review the communication between Systems 3 and 4:

1. Identify the key representatives of both systems in your organization:
   • System 3: Operational managers, department heads, resource allocators
   • System 4: Strategic planners, R&D, market research, innovation teams
2. Assess current communication patterns:
   • Frequency of interaction between these groups
   • Formality vs. informality of exchanges
   • Quality and depth of information sharing
   • Mutual understanding of each other's perspectives
   • Evidence of productive conflict vs. destructive conflict or avoidance
3. Evaluate the information flow between the systems:
   • Does System 4 have accurate, up-to-date information about operational capabilities?
   • Does System 3 receive relevant information about external trends and future possibilities?
   • Is information exchanged regularly and systematically?
   • Are there barriers to information sharing that need to be addressed?
4. Analyze the outcome quality of the interaction:
   • Are strategies developed with adequate operational input?
   • Are operational decisions made with awareness of strategic implications?
   • Do innovations consider both practical implementation and future needs?
   • Is there evidence of learning and adaptation based on the exchange?
5. Document your findings about the current state of communication:
   • Strengths to build upon
   • Gaps or weaknesses to address
   • Specific examples illustrating the current interaction quality

Example Communication Review

In a manufacturing company's review:

• Current state: Monthly meetings between operations (System 3) and product development (System 4), but conversations are perfunctory with limited exchange of substantive information.
• Information gaps: Product development has outdated understanding of production capabilities, leading to designs that cause manufacturing challenges. Operations has limited visibility into emerging customer needs.
• Interaction quality: Tension exists but manifests as avoidance rather than productive conflict. Each group retreats to their domain rather than engaging in meaningful dialog.
• Decision impact: Strategic plans lack operational feasibility, while operational improvements don't align with future product direction.

This review revealed that while formal communication channels existed, they weren't facilitating the productive tension and exchange needed for an effective adaptive space.

Key Indicators of Effective Communication

When reviewing Systems 3 and 4 communication, look for these positive indicators:

1. Mutual respect: Both perspectives are valued despite their different orientations
2. Healthy debate: Disagreements are expressed and explored rather than avoided
3. Shared language: Common terminology that bridges operational and strategic concepts
4. Regular interaction: Sufficient frequency of engagement to maintain understanding
5. Integrated planning: Evidence that strategies incorporate operational realities
6. Balanced decisions: Consideration of both current capabilities and future needs
7. Learning orientation: Willingness to update perspectives based on new information
8. Documented exchanges: Formal record-keeping of key decisions and rationales

The goal is not to eliminate tension between these systems but to ensure it manifests as productive dialogue rather than dysfunctional conflict or avoidance. Effective communication between Systems 3 and 4 creates the foundation for an organization that can both operate efficiently today and adapt effectively for tomorrow.