Where does “entropositive” mean? It is a contraction of entropy and positive. Scientists will tell us “how can entropy be positive?” It is always a negative value, as it represents energy becoming un-available during a transformation. But we did not like “entronegative”. Our goal is to show how we can optimise entropy in human activity, a little bit if we say “cost optimisation” it certainly does not mean higher costs, unless you are the one who writes the expense notes. Also, entropy, as a pretty new concept, is not yet fully understood, even by the scientific community. Entropy is not just “lost” energy but the power behind the creation of the Universe itself: without entropy, there would be no time, no gravity, no complexity in matter. Entropy “brings” us to more complexity and we need increased complexity when we build something. Imagine a bunch of Lego bricks: if you don’t invest some energy in putting together this great castle. Entropy is not a “bad” value, it is a constraint, and understanding the nature of it leads to a better way of doing things. Once you have this in mind, it becomes a reflex, every time you see or do something you will start evaluating the entropy quotient of it and look for optimisation. Now you have become entropositive!
Like many, probably as much as all my colleagues working in the transformation project/programme management field, I was observing revealingly similar patterns of wasting time, resources and money across the industries. Some organisations are certainly worse than others, but I think we all can tell our share of stories of transformation efficiency. What cause-to-effect phenomena are responsible to phenomenal losses of up to 9 digit figures, when most people involved do their best and nobody in particular is to blame, in general? I don’t know if my analysis is generally shared among the profession, because the omertà around failure is the prevailing law. Nobody really wants to be associated to broken projects or programmes and the politically correct behaviour, among employees or contractors, is the prevailing silence. But does stating the obvious help the industry getting better? Probably not.
After one more of these broken absolutely huge hundreds of millions transformation programmes, I decided to proceed to systematic autopsies, looking for common denominators of the chaos and emerging patterns. While I was there, I started discussing these with a bunch of scientist friends. One of them is a AI researcher and when comparing the fundamental principles of autonomous machines to human intelligence governance, something stood out: if decision-taking is to be successful, it distils to four pillars.
Whether it is a machine which must decide to go left or right, to slow down or to accelerate, or managers and consultants implementing changes in infrastructure or organisation, if the basic laws of thermodynamics were ignored, there will be blood! I also looked at the successful programmes I had the pleasure to lead from scratch or, like most of them, bring back on track, and there were enough of those not only to distil another theory but a solid and fact proven concept!
So, what is this Rosho.World Compass that has the potential to make transformation finally successful? Simply the same quadrantal magic as any other sustainable system in the Universe: purpose, values, constraints, entropy. If you can take control over these four parameters, it simply has the potential to work out, and long term. Read more in our white paper!
Transformation Programme manager and co-founder of Rosho.World