Bounded Applicability

The principle of bounded applicability, listed by Dave Snowden as one of the seven key principles of anthro-complexity simply refers to the point that different things work (or are applicable) in different contexts. The essential corollaries of that are:

1. there is no method or tool that works in all contexts – everything has limitations
2. the fact that something does not work in all contexts does not mean that it does not work in general.

Bounded applicability is also expressed in everyday sayings that can be encountered in the complexity space, such as “horses for courses” .

Bounded applicability, complexity and the Cynefin framework

The concept of bounded applicability is built into the Cynefin framework, which as a decision-making framework that acknowledges complexity partially serves as a guide to the boundaries of applicability, as well as the reasons behind it. Cynefin also demonstrates how apparently ontologically incompatible systems can co-exists. This ontology of systems is also essential to bounded applicability, expressed in the phrase “epistemology follows ontology”. In philosophy, ontology refers to how things are; their nature. Epistemology, on the other hand, is concerned with how knowledge on the nature of things is obtained. The saying “epistemology follows ontology”, therefore, can be explained as “the way we appropriately learn needs to adapt to the nature and properties of a system. As a principle, bounded applicability emphasises that this coherence between context and methods, tools, or approaches is not only necessary, but also possible. It also allows us to acknowledge, respect, and bring together diverse approaches, while allowing them to remain within appropriate boundaries.

Phase shifts

The concept of a phase shift helps clarify the idea of approaching a boundary, and the changes in appropriateness as a boundary is crossed. This means that identifying the likely boundaries and intermediate areas in a specific context is key to identifying what needs to change on either side of the boundary. An important implication in that is that it encourages a multiplicity and diversity of methods, rather than the wholesale rejection of one and the adoption of another, as different aspects of a context might have different characteristics, and contexts shift over time. So reaching a boundary or phase shift doesn’t mean throwing everything out and starting from zero, but the boundary still needs to be recognised. A common heuristic for the identification of such boundaries is that handling new cases and issues becomes increasingly costly and cumbersome. In such cases, bounded applicability also offers a warning; under changing conditions when then-current practice does not work as well, the response should not be doubling down and doing it even more intensively but exploring the implications of a boundary and the changing practices it might require.

Blogs & References

• Dave Snowden, Twelvetide 20:09 Manege and menage, The Cynefin Co website (January 2, 2021)
• Dave Snowden, Of congruence and coherence, The Cynefin Co website (November 28, 2020)
• Dave Snowden, Wisdom, tyranny and stupidity, The Cynefin Co website (September 8, 2006)