When we talk about law as an “ecosystem,” we’re describing a well-defined “location” full of diverse entities with varying needs, wants and motivations.
Within that ecosystem, there are actors and the resources that they covet or use. There are also a whole host of “unknowns” or factors that guide development of the ecosystem.
There are two types of “unknowns”: those we can learn and those that remain hidden because we cannot know them.
And example of a knowable legal “unknown” is the composition of a jury (itself an ecosystem that we understand fairly well). Seasoned litigators do what they can to shape the constituent parts of the jury,–but they can never know exactly what an individual juror is thinking. The jurors themselves do not know,–what develops throughout a trial is a type of ecosystem “maturation.”
Even with rigorous jury selection, moreover, lawyers have no way of controlling the synergistic effect of various personalities once they reach the deliberation stage. All they can do is work the odds. And, they know that while they’re “working the odds,” the ecosystem is changing around them. Every new fact, every ruling changes not only the actors, but their resources, wants and needs.
The cowboy lawyer operates within any such ecosystem and is limited to her own perceptions and ability to interact within the “location.” That is why a team will almost always going to triumph over a lone ranger: the well-integrated perceptions of many will provide greater adaptivity than the completely integrated (but inherently faulty) perceptions of the individual.
Sounds simple, right? but, when we talk about “surfing” and the edges of “chaos,” what we’re able to do with Agile principles is start to draw the contours of what we don’t know or cannot control.
Far from erasing individual contribution “for the good of the whole,” an Agile approach forces each participant to take responsibility and to maximize his contribution.
An Agile lawyer would never dare stand in front of a judge and blame members of his team (including his client)for a mistake, taking no responsibility himself. And, a judge, with an understanding of what is possible with Agile methodologies would never accept such an excuse as a valid statement of reality.
If we go back to basic chemistry, a useful exercise is to look at law,–or any system, as a series of chemical reactions.
From this highly simplified model, we can clearly see that chaos is a range. It is the angle shift, or delta between what we expect and what we do not. because both of these are elastic, we can definitely say that “chaos is a range.”
Agile is concerned with defining the ecosystem, so that our activities within that ecosystem can become more effective and efficient. We are very clear about what we can control and what we cannot. We pay homage to those things beyond our knowing or control, but work within realistic constraints so that the impact of unforeseen or unforeseeable change is minimized.
[ image coming ]
Iteration is one tool that allows us to gradually understand our objectives within the ecosystem and to make small adjustments as we move towards our goals.
iteration allows us to walk through the ecosystem by taking baby steps, so that if we find that an adaptation does not suit us, we can shift to one that allows us greater freedom within the ecosystem.
What we cannot do is lock down our way of walking, because then we are limited to the options of growth, failure or duplication. By using methodologies that not only respect change, but embrace it as a matter of risk management, we open the door to unexpected outcomes, such as new organization, a new entity or a new combination of resources.
This is nothing new in the law,–the difference is that Agile allows your team to systematically understand the ecosystem, rather than simply sink-or-swim within it.
Want to learn more?
