Me : For over a decade I've talked about the peace, war and wonder cycle. All require a different attitude (hence pioneers, settlers, town planners) but any organisation will have functions at different stages at the same time ...
Me : Long story. Outside the scope of this thread.
X : Not sure I like your new graphical style.
Me : Broken laptop. Making the most of what I have.
Me : Ok, we're way off topic now. Cummings is no Deng Xiaoping. Sorry. I see little or no evidence of understanding context, all I see is manipulation (a gameplay) and the inevitable erosion of trust as values are undermined.
Me : Wow, loaded again. There are lots of great people out there. There are natural leaders who not only understand context and values but have put the effort into doing so. People like @jacquitaylorfb who is one of my favourite.
Me : Yes. But that's quite advanced. Lots of pitfalls.
X : Such as?
Me : Maps won't give you an answer, you have to apply thought ...
X : Intent?
X : What about a roadmap?
Me : Hmmm.
Me : Most corporate roadmaps aren't maps. They're mostly beliefs and desires about the future, not usually based upon much and with inflexibility built in. I prefer maps, principles and intent.
Me : Well, you could do this. What you're actually doing is taking an impefect representation plus your intent to make a change and then baking into a somewhat permanent view of what the future is like. I'm not a fan of that.
Me : You can give direction and intent (i.e. cross the river) without having to explain every single stone along the way. Roadmaps and such plans are a very .... linear way of thinking. That can be very dangerous in a dynamic space.
Me : It's far more than most ever get.
X : But what if they do the wrong thing?
Me : You're just as likely to be wrong. The map give you a two way mechanism of communication, challenge and learning.