Frameworks as Mental Handrails for Navigating Complexity
In his article “Frameworks,” published on open.substack.com, Mike Fisher presents a compelling metaphor: frameworks are “handrails for thinking.” They provide the scaffolding needed to navigate uncertainty and complexity, transforming overwhelming problems into manageable tasks.
The core idea is that frameworks simplify complexity by providing structure, much like a recipe guides a cook or an algebraic simplification clarifies an equation.
This structure is not just for convenience; it is rooted in cognitive science. Fisher explains that frameworks help by:
- Reducing Cognitive Load: By organising information into clear patterns, frameworks free up our limited working memory. This allows us to allocate mental energy to higher-order tasks like creativity and problem-solving, rather than managing basic complexity.
- Guiding Through Uncertainty: Like a handrail on a dark staircase, a framework offers stability and a clear path forward when the environment is ambiguous. It reduces the fear of missteps and builds confidence.
- Mitigating Cognitive Biases: Structured methods like SWOT or the Eisenhower Matrix force a deliberate evaluation of multiple perspectives, acting as a check against common biases like confirmation bias or overconfidence.
However, Fisher wisely cautions against rigidity. Over-reliance on a framework can stifle creativity and lead to oversimplification. The key is to use them as a starting point—to adapt, question, and even build your own.
Reflection from a Systems Perspective
As a practitioner of TOGAF and Systems Engineering, this perspective is foundational. These disciplines are, at their core, the application of structured frameworks to manage immense complexity.
TOGAF’s Architecture Development Method (ADM) is a perfect example of a “handrail.” It breaks down the monumental task of designing an enterprise architecture into distinct, manageable phases. This reduces the cognitive load on architects and provides a common language for stakeholders, ensuring a project moves forward with clarity. Similarly, the V-model in Systems Engineering provides a clear framework for development and validation, ensuring that what is built aligns with what was required.
Beyond their direct application in problem-solving, frameworks are invaluable communication tools. They help in finding the right level of detail for a specific audience, ensuring that complex information is conveyed effectively. When frameworks are used well, they empower stakeholders to ask more structured and relevant questions, leading to more focused discussions and better-informed decisions. This steering of the discussion towards productive outcomes is a critical, often overlooked, benefit of employing robust frameworks.
These frameworks are not rigid rulebooks. The most effective architects and engineers know how to tailor them. They adapt the ADM to their organisation’s specific needs or modify the V-model for a unique project context. This aligns with Fisher’s final point: the goal is not blind adherence but thoughtful engagement. Frameworks are the mental infrastructure that enables us to build complex systems, but their real usefulness is realised when we adapt them to the terrain.
