Synopsis
As already noted, the seamless integration of business processes and IT systems may bring new relevancy to the OODA (Observation, Orientation, Decision, Action) loop, a real-time decision-making paradigm originally developed by Colonel John Boyd for USAF fighter jets.
Of particular interest for today’s business operational decision-making is the orientation step, i.e the actual positioning of actors and the associated cognitive representations; the point being to use AI deep learning capabilities to surmise opponents plans and misdirect their anticipations. That new dimension and its focus on information brings back cybernetics as a tool for enterprise governance.
In the Loop: OODA & Information Processing
Whatever the topic (engineering, business, or architecture), the concept of agility cannot be understood without defining some supporting context. For OODA that would include: territories (markets) for observations (data); maps for orientation (analytics); business objectives for decisions; and supporting systems for action.
One step further, contexts may be readily matched with systems description:
- Business contexts (territories) for observations.
- Models of business objects (maps) for orientation.
- Business logic (objectives) for decisions.
- Business processes (supporting systems) for action.
That provides a unified description of the different aspects of business agility, from the OODA loop and operations to architectures and engineering.
Architectures & Business Agility
Once the contexts are identified, agility in the OODA loop will depend on architecture consistency, plasticity, and versatility.
Architecture consistency (left) is supposed to be achieved by systems engineering out of the OODA loop:
- Technical architecture: alignment of actual systems and territories (red) so that actions and observations can be kept congruent.
- Software architecture: alignment of symbolic maps and objectives (blue) so that orientation and decisions can be continuously adjusted.
Functional architecture (right) is to bridge the gap between technical and software architectures and provides for operational coupling.
Operational coupling depends on functional architecture and is carried on within the OODA loop. The challenge is to change tack on-the-fly with minimum frictions between actual and symbolic contexts, i.e:
- Discrepancies between business objects (maps and orientation) and business contexts (territories and observation).
- Departure between business logic (objectives and decisions) and business processes (systems and actions)
When positive, operational coupling associates business agility with its architecture counterpart, namely plasticity and versatility; when negative, it suffers from frictions, or what cybernetics calls entropy.
Systems & Entropy
Taking a leaf from thermodynamics, cybernetics defines entropy as a measure of the (supposedly negative) variation in the value of the information supporting the control of viable systems.
With regard to corporate governance and operational decision-making, entropy arises from faults between environments and symbolic surrogates, either for objects (misleading orientations from actual observations) or activities (unforeseen consequences of decisions when carried out as actions).
So long as architectures and operations were set along different time-frames (e.g strategic and tactical), cybernetics were of limited relevancy. But the seamless integration of data analytics, operational decision-making, and IT supporting systems puts a new light on the role of entropy, as illustrated by Boyd’s OODA and its orientation component.
Orientation & Agility
While much has been written about how data analytics and operational decision-making can be neatly and easily fitted in the OODA paradigm, a particular attention is to be paid to orientation.
As noted before, the concept of Orientation comes with a twofold meaning, actual and symbolic:
- Actual: the positioning of an agent with regard to external (e.g spacial) coordinates, possibly qualified with the agent’s abilities to observe, move, or act.
- Symbolic: the positioning of an agent with regard to his own internal (e.g beliefs or aims) references, possibly mixed with the known or presumed orientation of other agents, opponents or associates.
That dual understanding underlines the importance of symbolic representations in getting competitive edges, either directly through accurate and up-to-date orientation, or indirectly by inducing opponents’ disorientation.
Agility vs Entropy
Competition in networked digital markets is carried out at enterprise gates, which puts the OODA loop at the nexus of information flows. As a corollary, what is at stake is not limited to immediate business gains but extends to corporate knowledge and enterprise governance; translated into cybernetics parlance, a competitive edge would depend on enterprise ability to export entropy, that is to decrease confusion and disorder inside, and increase it outside.
Working on that assumption, one should first characterize the flows of information to be considered:
- Territories and observations: identification of business objects and events, collection and analysis of associated data.
- Maps and orientations: structured and consistent description of business domains.
- Objectives and decisions: structured and consistent description of business activities and rules.
- Systems and actions: business processes and capabilities of supporting systems.
Then, a static assessment of information flows would start with the standing of technical and software architecture with regard to competition:
- Technical architecture: how the alignment of operations and resources facilitate actions and observations.
- Software architecture: how the combined descriptions of business objects and logic facilitate orientation and decision.
A dynamic assessment would be carried out within the OODA loop and deal with the role of functional architecture in support of operational coupling:
- How the mapping of territories’ identities and features help observation and orientation.
- How decision-making and the realization of business objectives are supported by processes’ designs.
Assuming a corporate cousin of Maxwell’s demon with deep learning capabilities standing at the gates in its OODA loop, his job would be to analyze the flows and discover ways to decrease internal complexity (i.e enterprise representations) and increase external one (i.e competitors’ representations).
That is to be achieved with the integration of operational analytics, business intelligence, and decision-making.
Further Readings
- Business Agility & the OODA Loop
- Enterprise Governance & Knowledge
- Events & Decision-making
- EA: Entropy Antidote
- EA: Maps & Territories