Stucco is used to un-stick a mess. A mess is a situation that we don't like and whatever we do it seems to stay the same or get worse. Examples of messes could be static sales, work/home balance, a team that is not working well together.

Most of the time we get on fine by looking only at actions and outcomes. To achieve a result or an outcome we take an action or, in the face of a set of outcomes or driving conditions we take an action.

When we are in a mess we need to look more closely at the complete system within which our actions turn into outcomes and that has us choose particular actions in the face of a set of outcomes or driving conditions.

When we take an action what happens next is not always what we expect, that is because there are external forces beyond our control that intervene. For example we go to the airport to catch a flight to get somewhere at a certain time, if the flight is delayed leaving due to bad weather then we will not get the outcome we expected. A greater understanding of external forces can help us design our actions to take them into account.

Stucco is particularly valuable when:

• We are caught in a vicious circle where it seems that no matter what we do, we end up in the same place

• It feels like we are in a mess and there is a need to break free

• Actions aren't working

• There is a need to examine the beliefs and assumptions behind the actions we have taken

• There is a need to investigate what external factors are affecting our actions

• We don't know what to do next

Stucco gets beyond hunches, guesswork and limited, linear ‘fix it’ thinking. It reveals the structure and the roots of the mess through a process of data gathering, mapping, integrative pattern making, and analysis of the relationships between the patterns.

We begin with a messy situation which seems to constrain us. We work backward in time and space to discover the root cause which has propagated through time in countless ways:

• Define our situation as a set of measurable conditions

• Catalogue behaviour which seems to produce the conditions of the mess

• Infer a set of influences which are necessary and sufficient to convert our behaviours into the conditions of the mess

With this comprehensive view of behaviour, influence and situation we turn to the likely core of the mess: the beliefs, assumptions, strategies and mental models held in our minds.

Standing back from the scene to gain a consulting perspective, we adopt a ‘witness’ point of view. As witnesses rather than participants, we define the roots of our mess, by inferring the set of beliefs, assumptions and mental models which must be operational if we act as we do in the face of our critical influences and real conditions.

From this insight into operating beliefs we are free to postulate a practical transition which can break the cycle: a definable, measurable change of mind. We can invent and embark on a rational learning path to a new mess which is much more to our liking. Now, we can truly change the timeline.

We continue this logical exploration until we land on a set of trial mental models and alternative behaviours which we believe will better serve us. We combine these into action learning experiments which we can enthusiastically engage in the real world and get to work.

ARTICULATING THE MESS

Start by describing what seems to be stuck, as both a story and a set of specific measures, in enough detail that we can relate specific things we do, or don’t do, to the landscape as we are experiencing it. We need the overview story so we can perceive every aspect of our lives or businesses that is involved.

SITUATION

These are the definable and measurable set of circumstances or conditions that we are trying change or break free from. Most of the time, we describe a mix of overall and specific conditions as the basis for our actions. This is simple cause and effect thinking – an outcome I experience ‘makes’ me react in some way, and I get another outcome as a result of my reaction.

Take time to get clear on the specifics of the situation that you are trying to break out of or change.

What is happening that needs to change, what is the thing that isn’t working?

The conditions can be described in family, social, political, business, economic, physical and emotional terms. In some measure, they result from our previous decisions, actions and inaction.

DOINGS

These are the things we are doing to break free of a certain situation or set of circumstances.

What actions have we taken to date to change the situation?

It is sometimes useful to break this section down into Right Doings, Wrong Doings and Not Doings:

• What are you doing that seems to be moving you in the right direction? What are the actions you are taking which feel like the best you can do?

• What are you doing that feels like it’s not helping? What are you doing that you know to be ‘wrong’ (but is possibly being done for other reasons or because there is no alternative)?

• What aren’t you doing that might help? Is there anything that you know would improve your circumstances, but are not doing for some reason?

FORCES

Forces are those external influences on our businesses and lives which we have little or no control over. Usually, these are big entities and powerful people, essential physical laws, and cultural, economic or environmental trends. The weather, taxes, and market forces are good examples.

What external factors could be affecting the outcomes resulting from the actions that we are taking? What things do we have no control over?

Almost everyone identifies forces which they consider being outside their sphere of influence, but which are not forces at all. We perceive the expectations that others have of us as immutable forces, whereas these expectations could actually be a product of our behaviour over time. If we have done things in a certain way for months or years, they become familiar with this pattern and expect this standard to be maintained – but it may not be what they truly demand of us. If we were to ask them what they actually need, we would get a more accurate picture of the forces.

BELIEFS

Our assumptions and beliefs are personal. They are the things we believe to be true which influence the actions we take. When we are confronted with a set of conditions and we have a goal in mind, we construct a cause and effect logic based on these beliefs and then act based on that logic.

We are trying to figure out why we make the choices we do. Very often we do not really know our beliefs, or are unwilling to recognise them. Then we have some logical work to do.

What would someone have to believe or assume to be true in order to have taken this action?

We stand back, and speculate on the Beliefs that would make sense of the Doings. If a team of consultants were to observe us in action, what Beliefs would they assume we must hold in order to be making these choices? By acting as witnesses in this way, we are less likely to be defensive or try to justify what we have done – they are just Doings that we are trying to understand the context for.

PATTERNS OF SITUATION AND DOINGS

Looking for patterns between the Situation and the Doings helps us to learn more about the beliefs and assumptions that drove our actions. What actions did you take in the past that set up these conditions? Keep going deeper into the past searching for root conditions and root actions which are in the history of the Mess.

• What conditions tell you that the actions are the right ones?

• What conditions seem to be forcing the wrong actions?

• What conditions are stopping action being taken?

THE VICIOUS CYCLE

Tell the story in sequence from Situation, through Beliefs, Doings, and Forces, that explains how the Mess was created. If something is missing or doesn’t make sense, revisit that domain until the story feels complete.

CREATING A NEW CYCLE

We can now take our work to the Insight Cycle to create a more virtuous upward spiral to replace the vicious downward spiral of the Mess.

New Beliefs
When at the stage of shifting beliefs, simply ask: how could this belief be modified in a way that would lead to a different action? You can also ask: what would be the opposite of this assumption or belief? These new beliefs are the Mind domain of the Insight Cycle.

New Doings
Brainstorm a few actions that someone who actually held such new beliefs would do. We add these to the Behaviour domain.

Forces
Add the most relevant Forces to the Influences domain and test the behaviours or new doings against them. We may modify the actions as a result.

Situation
Project a range of conditions that could emerge from these new actions, and record them under Situation.

VENTURES

Finally we test our thinking in the real world, getting things moving in small, positive ways while we experiment with alternative beliefs and alternative actions which we have discovered through Stucco. Ventures are intended to be explorations into the vast possibility that we have not yet experienced, so start with a learning experiment that we can complete in a week or two.

This exploration will give us a first level of knowledge of the validity of our alternative beliefs and our trial doings.

The work with Stucco creates plenty of material for potential ventures. Our job is to take that work and integrate it into one or two trials for the coming weeks and then go do them and see what happens. Nothing much more than that is assumed or necessary.

With enough testing, our minds will change. The alternative belief will, over time, become a core belief, surrounded by direct experience to validate its status. One change in our assumptions and the resulting experiments can lead to a complete resolution of the Mess.

Use the online tool

Download a copy of the map - step 1 and step 2

Download a Stucco case study

Start by describing The Mess in whatever way it shows up, this will overlap with the four domains, and it is helpful to have an element of each in this first conversation.

When working with a group, don't move on from describing The Mess and Driving Conditions until everyone has agreed on the description of what needs to change.

When identifying the Beliefs that would be consistent with the actions taken in the face of the current situation, act as an 'outside observer' - step out of the situation and ask what someone would have to believe or assume to be true in order to have taken that action:

• Refer to "they", "he" or "she" when stating beliefs rather than "we" or "you"
• Consider asking the group or individuals to change seats to change the dynamics before generating Beliefs
• Don't make it personal, and don't make them wrong – telling someone what they believe can feel judgemental, an accusation that they are irrational

Before choosing new Beliefs and Doings, tell the story of how The Mess came to exist (it can be helpful to use the Insight Cycle as a framework for this playback) – this presents The Mess back in a way that enables us to make choices and empowers us to change our minds.

Finish the Stucco conversation by finding an action that can be used as a learning experiment – a venture that we can put into practice quickly, and will test and validate our new Beliefs and Doings.

Key learning points:

• Only by taking a step back can we really see what needs to be changed
• When we get stuck we often don't know what has gone wrong, and focus on Driving Conditions, Doings and Forces, rather than looking inside ourselves to see whether we have contributed to The Mess
• It's much easier to change our mind than it is to change the world, but we need help confronting our Beliefs and assumptions

The Business Problem

A company's HR Department was suffering from increasing information overload, primarily as a result a huge influx of emails on a daily basis. The amount of email of no relevance to the team was on the increase and wading through redundant information was starting to take up team members' valuable time. Team members tried various things to overcome the situation but nothing was working, it only appeared to result in yet more emails when they logged on each morning.

Approach

It appeared that the HR department was stuck in what we refer to as 'the mess' - complex, poorly understood, systemic processes which produce degenerative conditions for the client community. The degenerative condition in this case was described by the HR department as "increasing information overload". We could also describe the HR department's situation as a vicious cycle. It had taken various steps to reduce information overload but it appeared that this had no positive impact on the situation; in fact, things appeared to be getting worse. Our first option for tackling 'the mess' or a situation that appears like a vicious cycle is to use Stucco.

Workflow

An initial 30-minute meeting was held with the HR Director to discuss the current situation and understand the true nature of the problem. Stucco was then conducted in one three hour session with the company's HR team (6 HR executives and the HR Director), which generated output as summarised below. The HR Director took responsibility for developing, circulating and following up an action plan for the team, which included all the new actions arrived at by Stucco.

The Process

Conditions

The starting condition to work from was initially stated as "information overload". However, this needed to be more concrete and clear therefore we led some discussion to unpack the starting condition for Stucco. Questions asked included:

• How do you know that you are suffering from information overload?
• What is the consequence of information overload?

New data emerging from the group included the fact that the amount of emails the group was receiving was up by 30% per week compared with the same time last year. Team members were spending an average of 10% of their working day sifting through irrelevant emails. The consequence was that several projects were slipping and the team was failing to meet deadlines.

The starting condition was stated as: "Information overload, caused mainly by email, is affecting the HR team's performance, particularly its ability to meet deadlines".

Doings

The team was asked what actions it had taken to date. The following output was given (you can try to spot those that would fit into the three categories of right doings, wrong doings and not doings):

• Using preview pane to check emails for relevance
• Applying importance levels to all emails sent
• Reading unwanted emails because they seem interesting
• Sending out blanket emails to the whole company
• Not deleting unwanted emails
• People using the reply to all function carelessly
• Responding to emails the day they arrive in our in-box
• We don't let anyone else check our emails

Forces

The team was then asked what external forces helped contribute to the current situation.

• 24/7 culture
• Email has become the most popular method of communication - it is the default ahead of phone these days
• A reply-to-all button exists in our email package
• Email exists!
• Workloads are increasing due to increased targets
• People outside the team send a lot of emails

Beliefs

The group was then asked to look at the actions listed and speculate on what beliefs, assumptions, habits or policies must exist for the group to be acting as it did, given the condition of information overload. The following beliefs were stated in relation to each action:

• At least some of the emails received each day are relevant
• Categorising emails will help diminish the amount of overload
• It is acceptable to read any email, even if it has nothing to do with our work
• It isn't important to delete emails
• The 'reply to all' function can be used when replying to any email
• Emails have to be responded to the day they arrive
• Nobody else can be trusted to open our emails

Beliefs Revisited

The group was then asked to read through the list of beliefs stated and identify those that it might be able to flip so as to try out and experiment with new beliefs or assumptions. Having done this and generated a large list of new belief 'candidates', the group was then asked to select those that looked most likely to result in actions that would have a positive impact on the driving condition.

The new beliefs selected were:

• On some days, none of the emails received are relevant
• Categorising emails does not reduce the amount being received
• It is not acceptable to spend time reading emails just because they are interesting
• It is important to delete emails that are old or irrelevant
• The 'reply to all' function should be used sparingly and only when it is absolutely necessary for everyone to see your reply
• Some emails are urgent and therefore require a quick reply but others can be left for a day or two
• PAs can be trusted to read our emails

Doings Revisited

The group was then asked to come up with a new set of trial actions that could be taken as a result of the new set of beliefs. The following actions were listed as possible candidates:

• We train PAs to know what emails are priorities and what ones are irrelevant to us
• PAs do a first pass at our in boxes twice daily. They sift out emails that are irrelevant and put others in different folders according to priority
• Set up email prioritisation system
• Delete old or irrelevant emails or ask PAs to do this
• Only use the reply to all function when it is absolutely necessary for all those on the distribution list to see your reply – set up rules on when this would be the case
• Set up rules around response times for different types of email

Selecting New Actions

Each of the candidate actions listed was tested by assessing what outcome each would result in, giving the forces identified earlier. The actions selected, based on their perceived ability to positively impact the driving condition were:

• PAs do a first pass at our in boxes twice daily. They sift out emails that are irrelevant and put others in different folders according to priority
• Set up email prioritisation system
• PAs delete old and unwanted emails

Conclusion

The new actions have had a dramatic and positive impact for the HR team:

• HR team members now spend an average of 2% of their working day sifting through unwanted or irrelevant emails, an 8% decrease from previous statistics
• Project deadlines not met decreased from 20% to 7%
• The HR team's approach to managing email has been deemed best practice throughout the organisation
• Other departments are now using the HR team's email prioritisation system as well as following its example of making better use of PAs' time to help with incoming emails