This resonates deeply — especially the idea of writing from “raw files” rather than retrospective coherence. What struck me is how clearly these patterns point to an orientation problem, not a competence one: people navigating complexity without enough shared sense-making infrastructure. I’m exploring similar questions from an art-led research perspective, especially where systems (and increasingly AI-mediated ones) move faster than human reflection. Your way of grounding systems thinking back into lived rooms and moments feels like exactly the right starting point.
Yes, this is exactly what I keep seeing. Most teams aren't struggling because they lack skill or are "broken". They're in a complex world without a shared map, and even capable people end up spinning when everyone's working from completely different mental models.
Your art-led research perspective sounds genuinely fascinating, especially around AI-mediated systems moving faster than human reflection. I experience this gap myself: systems evolving daily, decisions compounding weekly, and meanwhile we, the humans, are still trying to make sense of last quarter's reality.
I try hard to avoid the 20/20 hindsight trap where everything gets tidied up into a neat lesson. Raw feels real to me. Being authentic aka not coming across like a smartass or patronizing or condescending, is something I care about deeply. I've been on the receiving end of that too many times as a woman in tech, and especially as a woman tech leader. It happens more than it should. So I make a conscious effort not to do it to others. Will I mess up sometimes? Probably. But at least my intent is clear.
Your work sounds like it's tackling this from a completely different direction, and I'd be curious to hear more about where it leads. I subscribed :)
Thanks for your reply Mateja - and for subscribing! I’ll be subscribing to your work too.
What you describe resonates strongly with me: systems moving fast while human sense-making struggles to keep pace, not because people lack skill, but because shared maps are missing.
Your commitment to staying with the “raw,” and your care around tone and power, especially as a woman in tech leadership, really comes through.
As your're right, my work comes from a very different direction, as art-led practice - (informed by, but outside of the academic space) - but we share these concerns about keeping things humane inside complexity.
This hits on something most leadership writing avoids: the gap between what’s said publicly and what actually happens in rooms where people are tired, under pressure, and trying their best with imperfect information. Your “raw file” approach cuts through the performance layer and gets closer to how work really feels.
Patterns repeat everywhere—once you see them, you can finally lead instead of react.
This resonates deeply — especially the idea of writing from “raw files” rather than retrospective coherence. What struck me is how clearly these patterns point to an orientation problem, not a competence one: people navigating complexity without enough shared sense-making infrastructure. I’m exploring similar questions from an art-led research perspective, especially where systems (and increasingly AI-mediated ones) move faster than human reflection. Your way of grounding systems thinking back into lived rooms and moments feels like exactly the right starting point.
Yes, this is exactly what I keep seeing. Most teams aren't struggling because they lack skill or are "broken". They're in a complex world without a shared map, and even capable people end up spinning when everyone's working from completely different mental models.
Your art-led research perspective sounds genuinely fascinating, especially around AI-mediated systems moving faster than human reflection. I experience this gap myself: systems evolving daily, decisions compounding weekly, and meanwhile we, the humans, are still trying to make sense of last quarter's reality.
I try hard to avoid the 20/20 hindsight trap where everything gets tidied up into a neat lesson. Raw feels real to me. Being authentic aka not coming across like a smartass or patronizing or condescending, is something I care about deeply. I've been on the receiving end of that too many times as a woman in tech, and especially as a woman tech leader. It happens more than it should. So I make a conscious effort not to do it to others. Will I mess up sometimes? Probably. But at least my intent is clear.
Your work sounds like it's tackling this from a completely different direction, and I'd be curious to hear more about where it leads. I subscribed :)
Thanks for your reply Mateja - and for subscribing! I’ll be subscribing to your work too.
What you describe resonates strongly with me: systems moving fast while human sense-making struggles to keep pace, not because people lack skill, but because shared maps are missing.
Your commitment to staying with the “raw,” and your care around tone and power, especially as a woman in tech leadership, really comes through.
As your're right, my work comes from a very different direction, as art-led practice - (informed by, but outside of the academic space) - but we share these concerns about keeping things humane inside complexity.
I’d love to continue the conversation.
This hits on something most leadership writing avoids: the gap between what’s said publicly and what actually happens in rooms where people are tired, under pressure, and trying their best with imperfect information. Your “raw file” approach cuts through the performance layer and gets closer to how work really feels.
Patterns repeat everywhere—once you see them, you can finally lead instead of react.