We help you conduct a situational analysis of the current operating environment based on the needs of the system you’re trying to implement. This involves assessing the current technological landscape and climate and then mapping out the value chains that will be required to create the system. To do this we use a technique called wardley mapping.

Wardley mapping was created by researcher Simon Wardley who is an evolutionary biologist by training. Here he explains the technique at OSCON 2014.

Here’s a simple visual diagram that we use with clients to develop their strategies.

When helping you develop a strategy, it is absolutely critical that we build up a shared understanding among stakeholders of the following components of a strategy:

Methods

This is how we facilitate the creation of your strategy. We create design thinking workshops to

1. Process Mapping: Map out your current processes, whos involved and what is it that they do
2. Performance Mapping: Then we define what the processes performance metrics are for effectiveness and efficiency.
3. Empathy Mapping: We then create an empathy map for each stakeholder involved in the process to get an understanding of what issues they are facing.
4. Value Chain Mapping: From here we can identify the components needed to create a solution to address the issues identified for each stakeholder.

To effectively build a shared understanding of your strategy we follow a few key design principles:

1. Group Workshops rather than individual desktop work
2. Face to Face interactions rather than emails
3. Filling out Visual Frameworks rather than Report Writing

We’ve listed below a few concepts that we will need to establish in order with you to ensure we are all on the same page.

Purpose

When working in government, you are typically in the business of shaping the behaviour of the entities (citizens, companies etc.) your department is responsible for.

Your goal typically is to create rules that ensure that amplify good behaviour and dampen bad behaviour within the jurisdiction you are responsible for. Before developing strategy you need understand and be aware of how rules affect behaviour. This is difficult to do as the consequences of rule changes may have unintended negative consequences. We’ll show you how to do this using by running multiple safe to fail experiments in sandboxed environment.

Landscape

To develop strategy you must first understand the landscape you are operating in. To do this you must:

1. Know your users (who are you serving) – covered by process mapping
2. Know their needs – covered by empathy mapping
3. Know the prerequisite activities to meet those needs – covered by value chain mapping
4. Add position (connect users, needs, and prerequisites from top to bottom according to dependence) – covered by value chain mapping
5. Add movement (place needs and prerequisites left to right according to evolutionary stage) – covered by value chain mapping

Governance

In government the environment in which you operate typically consists of:

• Governance Stack; the mechanisms used to shape behaviour e.g. legislation
• Governance Functions; the activities the government carries out in order to shape behaviour e.g. Registration, Authorisation, Monitoring, Inspection, Prosecution etc.
• Governed Entities; the actors whose behaviours we are trying to shape e.g. Citizens, Companies etc.
• Governing Entities; the guys who decide what the rules should be e.g. Political parties / Politicians / Policy Makers, Regulators, Government Departments etc.

The Governance Stack can be broken down into:

• International and Regional Agreements
• Legislation and Regulations
• Policies
• Processes and Procedures
• Technology

The Governance Function can be broken down into:

• Registration
• Authorisation
• Verification
• Whitelisting
• Monitoring
• Inspection
• Investigation
• Prosecution
• Blacklisting

The Governed Entities (and Assets) can be broken down into:

• Natural Persons i.e. Citizens
• Legal Persons e.g. Corporations, Companies, Organisations etc.
• Assets e.g. Land, Property, Vehicles, Vessels etc.

Evolution

All things evolve and this is true in technology. Technology evolves in a predictable fashion.

1. Technology typically starts with scientific investigation or research into a phenomenon. As scientists build up an understanding of the phenomenon further novel uses are discovered and developed for application of the phenomenon to problems. These novel uses are the birth of the technology (research phase).
2. Based on this research an understanding begins to grow on how to apply the technology to various other problems. A few scientists, engineers and hobbyists begin to use this understanding to create custom built applications for the use of the technology (development phase).
3. As development accelerates a market begins to form around the technology, a few companies emerge to provide the technology to the masses as a commodity product. Over several decades the market around the technology drives it the point where it is so commodised (cheap, reliable, repeatable) that it is used as a building block for other technologies. (market phase)
4. Some technologies evolve to such a highly commoditized stage where they can be delivered as a utility service (utility phase).

The table below contains a list of characteristics to help you determine how evolved something is.

Stage of Evolution	I	II	III	IV
Characteristics
Ubiquity	Rare	Slowly increasing consumption	Rapidly increasing consumption	Widespread and stabilising
Certainty	Poorly understood	Rapid increases in learning	Rapid increases in use / fit for purpose	Commonly understood (in terms of use)
Publication Types	Normally describe the wonder of the thing	Build / construct / awareness and learning	Maintenance / operations / installation / features	Focused on use
General Properties
Market	Undefined market	Forming market	Growing market	Mature market
Knowledge management	Uncertain	Learning on use	Learning on operation	Known / accepted
Market perception	Chaotic (non-linear)	Domain of experts	Increasing expectations of use	Ordered (appearance of being linear) / trivial
User perception	Different / confusing / exciting / surprising	Leading edge / emerging	Common / disappointed if not used or available	Standard / expected
Perception in industry	Competitive advantage / unpredictable / unknown	Competitive advantage / ROI / case examples	Advantage through implementation / features	Cost of doing business / accepted
Focus of value	High future worth	Seeking profit / ROI?	High profitability	High volume / reducing margin
Understanding	Poorly understood / unpredictable	Increasing understanding / development of measures	Increasing education / constant refinement of needs / measures	Believed to be well defined / stable / measurable
Comparison	Constantly changing / a differential / unstable	Learning from others / testing the water / some evidential support	Feature difference	Essential / operational advantage
Failure	High / tolerated / assumed	Moderate / unsurprising but disappointed	Not tolerated, focus on constant improvement	Operational efficiency and surprised by failure
Market action	Gambling / driven by gut	Exploring a “found” value	Market analysis / listening to customers	Metric driven / build what is needed
Efficiency	Reducing the cost of change (experimentation)	Reducing cost of waste (Learning)	Reducing cost of waste (Learning)	Reducing cost of deviation (Volume)
Decision drivers	Heritage / culture	Analysis & synthesis	Analysis & synthesis	Previous experience

Determining Movement

The movement of a component along the X axis is determined by its stage of evolution.

Stage of Evolution	I	II	III	IV
Activities	Genesis	Custom	Product (+rental)	Commodity (+utility)
Practices	Novel	Emerging	Good	Best
Data	Unmodelled	Divergent	Convergent	Modelled
Knowledge	Concept	Hypothesis	Theory	Accepted

Based on Simon Wardley‘s Evolutionary Characteristics Cheat Sheet, CC BY-SA 4.0.

Don’t worry if some of the terms are confusing… just use what you can. Like Chess, mapping is a craft and you will get better with practice.Simon Wardley in Finding a Path

Climate

The forces acting upon the environment. The rules of the game, patterns of the seasons, and competitor actions.

Competitors	Competitors actions will change the game	Most competitors have poor situational awareness
Components	Everything evolves through supply and demand competition	Evolution consists of multiple waves of diffusion with many chasms	No choice over evolution	Commoditisation does not equal Centralisation
Characteristics change as components evolve	No single method fits all	Components can co-evolve
Financial	Higher order systems create new sources of value	Future value is inversely proportional to the certainty we have over it.	Efficiency does not mean a reduced spend	Evolution to higher order systems results in increasing energy consumption
Capital flows to new areas of value	Creative Destruction
Inertia	Success breeds inertia	Inertia increases the more successful the past model is	Inertia can kill an organisation
Prediction	You cannot measure evolution over time or adoption	The less evolved something is then the more uncertain it is	Not everything is random	Economy has cycles
Two different forms of disruption	A “war” (point of industrialisation) causes organisations to evolve
Speed	Efficiency enables innovation	Evolution of communication can increase the speed of evolution overall	Change is not always linear	Shifts from product to utility tend to demonstrate a punctuated equilibrium

Based on Simon Wardley‘s, Climatic Patterns, CC BY-SA 4.0.

Patterns

The following are patterns that are very important to learn.

Pattern 1: All things evolve

Everything evolves from left to right under the influence of supply and demand competition.

Genesis Unique	Custom Uncommon	Product	Commodity
Genesis Unique, rare, uncertain, constantly changing, newly-discovered.The focus is on exploring.	Custom Uncommon, frequently-changing, requires artisanal skill, no two are the same.The focus is on learning and developing the craft	Product (and rental) Increasingly common, more defined, better understood. Repeatable processes. Change is slower. Initial differentiation but increasing stability and sameness. There are often many of the same kind of product.The focus is on refining and improving.	Commodity (and utility)Scale and volume operations of production. Highly standardized. Defined. Fixed. Undifferentiated. Fit for a specific known purpose. Repetition, repetition, repetition… With time, it becomes commonplace and less visible.The focus is on ruthlessly removing deviation, industrialising, and increasing operational efficiency.

Pattern 2: Characteristics Change

As components evolve, their characteristics change.

Uncharted	Industrialised
Chaotic	Ordered
Uncertain	Known
Unpredictable	Measured
Changing	Stable
Different	Standard
Exciting	Obvious
Future Worth	Low Margin
Unusual	Essential
Rare	Ubiquitous
Poorly Understood	Defined
Experimentation	Volume Operations
Differential	Operational Efficiency
Competitive Advantage	Cost of Doing Business

Doctrine (Self-Assessment)

The training of your people, the standard ways of operating, and the techniques that you almost always apply. Select cells multiple times to progress through colors indicating a weak, warning, good, and neutral (undetermined) status.

Phase 1: Stop Self Harm

Communication	Use a common language (necessary for collaboration)	Challenge assumptions (speak up and question)	Focus on high situational awareness (understand what is being considered)
Development	Know your users (e.g. customers, shareholders, regulators, staff)	Focus on user needs	Remove bias and duplication	Use appropriate methods (e.g. agile vs lean vs six sigma)
Learning	Use a systematic mechanism of learning (a bias towards data)
Operations	Think small (as in know the details)

Phase 2: Becoming More Context Aware

Communication	Be transparent (a bias towards open)
Development	Focus on the outcome not a contract (e.g. worth based development)	Be pragmatic (it doesn’t matter if the cat is black or white so long as it catches mice)	Use appropriate tools (e.g. mapping, financial models)	Think fast, inexpensive, restrained, and elegant (FIRE, formerly FIST)
Use standards where appropriate
Leading	Move fast (an imperfect plan executed today is better than a perfect plan executed tomorrow)	Strategy is iterative not linear (fast reactive cycles)
Learning	A bias towards action (learn by playing the game)
Operations	Manage failure	Manage inertia (e.g. existing practices, political capital, previous investment)	Effectiveness over efficiency
Structure	Think aptitude and attitude	Think small (as in teams, “two pizza”)	Distribute power and decision making

Phase 3: Better for Less

Leading	Be the owner (take responsibility)	Think big (inspire others, provide direction)	Strategy is complex (there will be uncertainty)	Commit to the direction, be adaptive along the path (crossing the river by feeling the stones)
Be humble (listen, be selfless, have fortitude)
Learning	A bias towards the new (be curious, take appropriate risks)
Operations	Optimise flow (remove bottlenecks)	Do better with less (continual improvement)	Set exceptional standards (great is just not good enough)
Structure	Seek the best	Provide purpose, mastery, & autonomy

Phase 4: Continuously Evolving

Leading	Exploit the landscape	There is no core (everything is transient)
Learning	Listen to your ecosystems (acts as future sensing engines)
Structure	Design for constant evolution	There is no one culture (e.g. pioneers, settlers and town planners)

Adapted by Tasshin Fogleman from this tweetstorm and Better for Less, courtesy of Simon Wardley, CC BY-SA 4.0.

Additional Instructions

By examining the doctrine in an organization, you can get an idea of how adaptable it is and how well it will respond to external change or gameplay. You can do this with your own organization, or with other organizations.

In-person? Gather several people from different levels of the organization and perform the above self-assessment together. (There may be arguments, but that’s not a bad thing.) Distributed? See this form-based assessment by Justin Stach.

Once you’ve assessed the status quo of doctrine in your organization, you can go about addressing areas of weakness. Simon suggests you do this in phases. The above self-assessment’s phases presents his best guess at the order in which you should tackle them.

Leadership (Gameplay)

The context-specific strategy you choose after considering your purpose, the landscape, the climate, and your capabilities.

Accelerators	Open approaches	Co-operation	Exploiting network effects	Industrial policy
Market enablement
De-accelerators	Exploiting constraint	IPR	Creating constraints
Dealing with toxicity	Pig in a poke	Sweat and Dump	Disposal of liability	Refactoring
Ecosystem	Sensing Engines (ILC)	Two factor markets	Alliances	Channel conflicts & disintermediation
Co-creation	Co-opting and intercession	Embrace and extend	Tower and moat
User Perception	Fear, uncertainty and doubt	Artificial competition	Brand and marketing	Bundling
Confusion of choice	Creating artificial needs	Education	Lobbying / counterplay
Attacking	Centre of gravity	Directed investment	Experimentation	Fool’s mate
Playing both sides	Press release process	Undermining barriers to entry
Competitor	Ambush	Circling and probing	Fragmentation play	Misdirection
Reinforcing competitor inertia	Restriction of movement	Sapping	Talent raid
Defensive	Defensive regulation	Limitation of competition	Managing inertia	Procrastination
Raising barriers to entry	Threat acquisition
Markets	Buyer / supplier power	Differentiation	Harvesting	Last man standing
Pricing policy	Signal distortion	Standards game	Trading
Poison	Designed to fail	Insertion	Licensing play
Positional	Fast follower	First mover	Land grab	Weak signal / horizon

Based on Simon Wardley‘s, On 61 Different Forms of Gameplay, CC BY-SA 4.0.

A Scenario

As an example, where might you focus in the below scenario (view in MapScript) if you wanted to increase competition around content?

To increase competition in content, the obvious option is to cause the industrialization (evolution) of the creative studios. More competition among studios would result in more, better content, so how could we make that happen?

A naive move might be to launch an independent creative studio or form a strategic partnership to advance one particular studio, but that game can all-too-easily be lost. There are more interesting options in the lower-level constraints (a Fool’s Mate).

If there were more competition among production systems, for example, the barrier to entry for new talent and therefore new creative studios would be lowered. An open approach would accelerate that process, indirectly causing increased competition among creative studios and ultimately content.

Chances are, the existing creative studios won’t have the situational awareness to recognize the play for what it is. In fact, they might support it in the name of short-term cost savings. Wild! Read more on this scenario in Simon’s post, Fool’s mate in Business.

Glossary

Name	Description
Context	Our purpose and the landscape
Environment	The context and how it is changing
Situational awareness	Our level of understanding of the environment
Actual	The map in use
Domain	Uncharted vs Transitional vs Industrialised
Stage	Of evolution e.g. Genesis, Custom, Product, Commodity
Type	Activity, Practice, Data or Knowledge
Component	A single entity in a map
Anchor	The user need
Position	Position of a component relative to the anchor in a chain of needs
Need	Something a higher level system requires
Capability	High level needs you provide to others
Movement	How evolved a component is
Interface	Connection between components
Flow	Transfer of money, risk & information between components
Climate	Rules of the game, patterns that are applied across contexts
Doctrine	Approaches which can be applied regardless of context
Strategy	A context specific approach

Image courtesy of Simon Wardley, CC BY-SA 4.0.