Fractally speaking

Fractals are repeated replications, in ever reducing size within the whole, of a basic pattern or shape that is itself governed by a determining set of principles (mathematical, biological or philosophical). Picture the repeated relationships in the twigs-branches-boughs-trunk of a tree. (FutureWorld 1996)

As organisations move towards this fractal order, it is clear that there are many dimensions that need to be considered and organised for this new model to work.

Benoit Mandelbrot, inventor of the term "fractal", gives this example: "If we draw a triangle and on each of the sides we draw a smaller triangle, and on each side of these we draw a still smaller one, and so on - we have a figure which exhibits self-similarity and is hence a fractal."

The importance and appropriateness of fractal thinking in business and organisations is increasingly becoming evident. There is increasing evidence of a groundswell around the disintegration of the large corporation as one large integrated entity. Some of the very, very successful mega-corporations today are internally organised as fractals. Furthermore, we see key people leaving large corporates and going into business for themselves as contractors and freelancers. As organisations move towards this fractal order, it is clear that there are many dimensions that need to be considered and organised for this new model to work.

Fractals live according to their own rules, interacting, connecting and feeding off each other's success. Access to information networks allows large and small businesses to tap into the same business resources and infrastructures. Both organisational and human behaviour is driving this trend. Big is no longer better just because it is big. Lean, small and fast is pretty much where it is at. Today, graduates and key people in companies do not see themselves as needing the dubious "security" of a corporate career and are quite happy to organise themselves as entrepreneurs in entities as small or as big as they need to be.

For the moment my focus is on fractal structures and making it a viable model for businesses that want the benefit of fractals but need to collaborate and face the world together. What we are looking for is the genetic code that will bind together these fractals. In my opinion, this hinges first of all on the power of corporate culture and values. If this commonality can be present in the genetic code of each of the fractals, the potential for discord and issues is hugely reduced. The experience with such a fractal will be common and the ability for the fractals to work together effectively will be hugely improved. This is the power of a common vision and a collective consciousness.

For example, if "customer delight" is a core principle that lives in the genetic code of the fractals, then a customer's experience with the "organisation" will be very similar, regardless of the fractal that they are dealing with. If information and knowledge sharing and an openness of mind are part of the genetic structure, then fractals will have an easier time working together.

Technology plays a role. With the proliferation of increasingly more powerful personal computers and broad, increasingly more available, electronic networks, we have in actual fact seen the introduction of the coordinating technologies of the 21^st century, the enablers of fluid, fractal organisations. Information can be shared instantly and inexpensively among many participants in many locations. Individuals can collaborate among themselves. They can coordinate their efforts for a very specific purpose among a network of small, autonomous businesses or individuals.

Process design is another key element of making these fractal organisations and networks work. Far from being random in its collaboration, the tasks and dependencies between fractals have to be planned and coordinated to seamlessly deliver a product or service to its market.

What about the role of "Management"? We will describe this as the coordination of people, flow of work, materials, money and so on. There is nothing implied there that is not totally compatible with the idea of smaller, networked organisations (enabled by today's technologies) which team up and work together, and then disband until the next opportunity presents itself.

Fractals are not judged on the rules of industrial companies. They are not judged on the number of years in business, the number of people they employ or how impressive their corporate head office is. They are judged simply on how effective they are in adding value to their joint customers. They are judged on how effective they are in playing their role in the process chain. And because of the nature of fractal organisations, they can be replaced very easily should they no longer provide value or if another fractal can potentially provide better value.

There are today many examples, across many industries which support the viability of this model, and the technology and building blocks are in place. The question is: Where are we, as individuals and businesses, in understanding and embracing this future?