Book Notes #38: The Agile Organization by Simon Reay Atkinson and James Moffat

Title: The Agile Organization: From Informal Networks to Complex Effects and Agility
Author: Simon Reay Atkinson and James Moffat
Year: 2005
Pages: 211

Have you ever felt like the real work in your organization happens despite the formal structure, not because of it? Like the people who make things happen aren’t the ones with the biggest titles, but the ones who know how to navigate the maze?

The Agile Organization is the kind of book that makes you nod your head because it puts words—and solid theory—around what you’ve always sensed. It’s not a book of frameworks or buzzwords.

It’s a human, smart, and deeply relevant guide to understanding how systems really work and why trust, networks, and adaptability are the real game changers in today’s fast-moving world.

As a result, I gave this book a rating of 8.5/10.

For me, a book with a note 10 is one I consider reading again every year. Among the books I rank with 10, for example, are How to Win Friends and Influence People and Factfulness.

3 Reasons to Read The Agile Organization

Book Overview

Have you ever noticed that in most organizations, the real work doesn’t happen through the official channels? It’s not always about who’s at the top of the org chart—it’s about who actually gets things done. It’s the person who knows whom to call, who can shortcut the red tape, who connects the dots across teams. Those hidden webs of relationships are what this book is all about.

The Agile Organization isn’t just a book about business or military strategy. It’s a book about how the world really works behind the scenes. The authors, Simon Reay Atkinson and James Moffat, take you on a journey through history, complexity theory, warfare, logistics, and even the wine trade to show how networks—informal, trust-based, and adaptive—shape everything. And not just in theory. From World War II operations to fuel strikes and disease outbreaks, they show how these human connections often outperform the rigid systems built to control them.

The book starts with a striking idea: rules and structures only take you so far. What keeps people moving, especially in times of crisis or uncertainty, isn’t a policy—it’s trust. That trust forms the backbone of informal networks, and these networks are everywhere. They’re how information really flows, how decisions get made quickly, and how organizations adapt when the plan doesn’t survive first contact with reality.

What’s fascinating is how the book explains complexity without drowning you in jargon. Using relatable metaphors—a sandpile ready to avalanche, water boiling into chaos, or a battlefield shifting moment by moment—they bring complex systems to life. You begin to see why traditional “command and control” thinking doesn’t hold up in unpredictable environments. It’s not about finding the perfect plan. It’s about creating systems that can adjust quickly when things change—which they always do.

One of the most eye-opening parts of the book is the distinction between formal and informal structures. Formal organizations are designed to endure—they hold the rules, budgets, and responsibilities. Informal networks, on the other hand, are fluid. They’re built on human connections and adapt in real time. The magic happens when both systems coexist and complement each other. Think of it like a football club (the formal structure) and the team (the informal network). You need both. Without the club, there’s no game. Without the team, there’s no point.

Throughout the chapters, the authors illustrate how small decisions can create outsized effects. A single bomb hitting a runway in the Falklands war shifted the entire strategic landscape. A small group of protesters with mobile phones brought the UK economy to a halt during a fuel crisis. These aren’t accidents. They’re the result of systems reaching a tipping point—what complexity theorists call the edge of chaos. It’s the moment when small inputs cause massive changes.

And this is where the book gets really practical. It’s not just about describing complexity—it’s about how to lead in it. Leaders can’t rely on giving detailed instructions for every possible situation. Instead, they need to communicate clear intent and build trust, so that people on the ground can make smart decisions when the unexpected happens. The British military has embraced this with what they call “Delegated Autonomous Command”—empowering even junior leaders to act on their judgment. Because in fast-moving environments, waiting for permission can be the difference between success and disaster.

The book also explores how information flows—or doesn’t. One of the more sobering examples comes from NASA’s Columbia disaster. Critical concerns were raised, but they never made it to decision-makers in time. Not because people didn’t care, but because the system didn’t talk to itself. There was no bridge between the informal signals and the formal process. And when trust and communication break down, the consequences are real.

Some key concepts include:

Informal Networks: Informal networks are human connections based on trust, shared context, and mutual benefit—not rules or official structures. These networks exist within and across organizations, often driving real decision-making and action. They self-organize, adapt quickly, and fill the gaps where formal systems are too slow or rigid. Unlike hierarchies, no one assigns people to informal networks; they form naturally through shared interests and trusted relationships.

Formal Organizations: Formal organizations are structured, rule-based systems built for stability and accountability. They use defined roles, responsibilities, and chains of command to operate. While efficient in routine, predictable contexts, they struggle in fast-changing environments. Their strength lies in scale, legal authority, and durability—but they often lack the flexibility needed for rapid adaptation.

Trust vs. Rules: Trust and rules are two different ways to coordinate action. Rules offer predictability and consistency but rely on enforcement. Trust, on the other hand, enables faster, more flexible cooperation without the need for constant oversight. In times of crisis or uncertainty, trust-based systems often outperform rule-based ones, as they allow for quicker response and adaptation.

Complex Adaptive Systems: These are open, interconnected systems—like societies, ecosystems, or organizations—where many agents interact and evolve over time. They don’t behave predictably like machines; instead, small actions can lead to massive ripple effects. The system as a whole adapts, learns, and self-organizes, making traditional top-down control ineffective.

Self-Organization: Self-organization is when groups, units, or individuals coordinate themselves without centralized control. In complex environments, this bottom-up coordination allows for faster response, innovation, and resilience. Effective self-organization depends on shared purpose, trust, and clear boundaries, not detailed instructions.

Effects-Based Operations (EBO): EBO is an approach to strategy that focuses on the outcomes or effects of actions, rather than just the actions themselves. It’s about shaping behavior, perceptions, and systems through a chain of effects—often across military, political, economic, and social dimensions. It requires understanding how one move triggers many responses, and designing actions that ripple in the right direction.

Agility: Agility is the capacity to sense, respond, and adapt effectively in a dynamic and uncertain environment. It’s not about speed alone, but about responsiveness and coherence. True agility arises from a blend of flexible structures, empowered teams, and shared strategic intent. It thrives in systems where trust replaces tight control and decision-making is decentralized.

Directed vs. Emergent Control: Directed control is top-down, based on planned steps and centralized authority. Emergent control is bottom-up, shaped by local context and real-time feedback. Modern systems need to blend both, using directed control to provide purpose and boundaries, while allowing emergence to handle complexity and change.

Delegated Autonomous Command: This model pushes authority down to the lowest capable level, allowing local actors to make decisions aligned with strategic intent. It requires leaders to trust their teams and to clearly communicate goals—not micro-manage steps. This approach enhances agility and is especially effective in fast-moving or unpredictable environments.

Command vs. Control: Command is about expressing intent, aligning efforts, and empowering teams. It relies on relationships, trust, and purpose. Control, by contrast, involves monitoring, enforcing compliance, and minimizing variance. In complex systems, overemphasizing control can lead to paralysis, while good command creates coherence even when plans break down.

Stakeholder Perception Space: This refers to how stakeholders interpret their environment, shaped by values, objectives, and predictions. Their behavior isn’t based solely on facts, but on how they perceive those facts. Effective strategy must take these perceptions into account—because changing outcomes often starts by shifting how people see the situation.

Influence Networks: Influence networks are webs of relationships that shape opinions, decisions, and behavior. These networks span formal and informal boundaries, operating through shared language, trust, and intent. In an interconnected world, influence often matters more than authority—because you can’t control everything, but you can shape how people respond.

Small World Networks: These networks have tightly clustered groups connected by a few long-range links. They combine local trust with global reach, making them efficient for spreading information and ideas. Organizations can benefit by creating these kinds of connections—linking distant teams without losing cohesion.

Scale-Free Networks: Scale-free networks grow around a few highly connected hubs. These hubs attract more links over time, creating power-law distributions. They’re robust against random failure but vulnerable to targeted attacks. Think of the internet, where a few big websites dominate traffic—disconnect one, and the whole network feels it.

Entropy in Information Systems: Entropy here refers to uncertainty or disorder in how information is shared and understood. High entropy means confusion and misalignment; low entropy means shared understanding and effective coordination. Informal networks, by increasing trust and information flow, can reduce entropy and improve system performance.

Ashby’s Law of Requisite Variety: This principle states that to effectively manage a complex system, the controlling system must be just as flexible and responsive. In other words, rigid structures can’t handle dynamic environments. Leaders and organizations must build internal variety—diverse thinking, adaptive processes—to keep up with external complexity.

Institutional Friction: Institutional friction occurs when formal systems and informal networks fail to communicate or align. This can block information flow, slow decisions, or cause critical signals to be missed. It’s often not about bad intentions, but about structural gaps that prevent the right people from hearing the right things at the right time.

Consent vs. Concessive Decision-Making: Consent-based decision-making requires full agreement before action, which can delay responses. Concessive decision-making allows actors to move forward within shared intent, assuming alignment unless told otherwise. It works well in trusted teams where speed and initiative are crucial.

Communities of Interest: These are flexible, cross-functional groups that form around shared purpose or mission, rather than strict hierarchy or department. They replace “stovepipes” with horizontal collaboration and are more suited to today’s complex, interconnected challenges.

Effects Space: This refers to the various domains—physical, informational, cognitive, social—where effects play out. A single action might strike one domain but ripple across others. Leaders must think in terms of cascading impacts, not isolated events.

Systemic Conflict: Systemic conflict isn’t just about two armies or organizations clashing. It’s a collision of entire systems—social, economic, political, and informational—each adapting and evolving in real time. Winning isn’t about overwhelming force; it’s about understanding, adapting, and influencing the system.

Hypothesis of Network Evolution: This is the idea that networks evolve from scale-free (hub-based), to small-world (clustered), and eventually into formal organizations. It’s a natural cycle: trust-based beginnings lead to structure for scalability, which then create the conditions for new networks to emerge again.

What’s refreshing about this book is that it doesn’t offer simple answers.

It embraces the messiness of real systems and offers a new way to think about leadership, decision-making, and coordination.

It challenges the assumption that more control equals better outcomes.

Sometimes, letting go—while maintaining a clear intent—is the most effective move.

In the end, The Agile Organization makes a powerful case: if we want to thrive in today’s interconnected, unpredictable world, we need to rethink how we lead, how we build teams, and how we design our organizations.

It’s not about throwing out structure, but about making room for adaptability.

It’s about moving from rigid control to trusted cooperation. And it’s about understanding that in a complex world, the smartest systems aren’t the ones that try to predict everything—they’re the ones that are ready for anything.

Agile Organization, Agile and Lean

What’s striking about this book is how deeply it resonates with the principles of Agile, Lean, and modern management—without ever trying to be a methodology manual.

If you’ve worked with Scrum, Kanban, or any kind of agile framework, you’ll recognize familiar ideas here, but explored from a much broader systems and human behavior perspective.

Agile thinking is built on values like collaboration, responding to change, and delivering value early and often. This book shows why those values matter—not just in software teams, but in governments, militaries, and complex social systems. It makes the case that adaptability isn’t just a team-level practice—it’s a strategic necessity in a networked world.

When the authors talk about delegated autonomous command, they’re essentially describing what empowered Scrum teams do: acting on intent, not waiting for permission, and continuously adjusting based on feedback.

Lean principles show up too—especially the idea of reducing waste, shortening feedback loops, and respecting people. The book’s emphasis on informal networks and trust aligns perfectly with Lean’s human-centered focus.

It also mirrors Lean’s push for decentralization: decisions made where the knowledge is, not just at the top. And its attention to “information entropy” echoes Lean’s concern for flow and alignment—when information doesn’t move well, nothing else does.

From a management perspective, the book challenges old-school control mindsets and hierarchy-driven models. It suggests that managing complexity requires a fundamental shift: from command and control to enable and empower.

You won’t find buzzwords here—no sprint planning, retrospectives, or Kanban boards—but the mindset is unmistakably agile.

The focus is always on outcomes over outputs, adaptability over perfection, and human networks over rigid systems.

So if you’re a team coach, a leader driving transformation, or someone simply trying to make work more human and effective, this book adds a new layer to what you already believe.

It helps explain why agility works—and why, without trust and systems thinking, even the best tools will fail. It takes the heart of Agile and Lean and stretches it into a full organizational philosophy for the modern world.

A military book about Agile?

We can’t quite call it a military book about agility, but we also can’t ignore that much of its insight comes from military experience. Here’s a clearer way to explain it:

This is not a traditional military book full of tactics, battles, or strategy lessons. It’s also not a business book trying to force military metaphors onto management.

Instead, it’s a systems-thinking book that uses military and governmental examples—because those are some of the most complex, high-stakes, and rule-heavy environments out there. If agility can work there, it can work anywhere.

The authors, both with defense backgrounds, use real military operations to illustrate broader points about how organizations function under pressure. But the lessons go far beyond the battlefield.

They apply to corporate change, crisis response, cross-functional teams, and leadership in uncertainty.

So, to sum it up: It’s not a book about military agility—it’s a book that borrows military experience to teach how agility works in any complex system. Whether you’re in government, business, healthcare, or tech, the ideas translate surprisingly well.

The Agile Organization dives into how the world has changed—how globalization, information flows, and complexity have made our old, top-down systems kind of… outdated.

It argues that we can’t rely solely on formal structures, rules, or rigid plans anymore.

Instead, we need to recognize and work with the informal networks that already exist inside every organization—the ones built on trust, shared purpose, and human connection.

The authors show that real agility doesn’t come from better processes—it comes from trusting people, empowering decision-making at all levels, and understanding that small actions can create massive ripple effects in a connected world.

They take lessons from history, military strategy, complexity science, and even wine trade networks to make the point that the future belongs to those who can blend structure with flexibility, and rules with relationships.

So the big message?

If we want to lead, manage, or operate effectively in today’s world, we need to stop trying to control everything.

Instead, we should focus on creating the conditions where trust-based, adaptive networks can thrive.

That’s where resilience and impact really come from.

Chapter by Chapter

Chapter 1 – Stop the World, I Want to Get Off!

This chapter sets the tone for the entire book, diving into the tension between rules and trust, formal organizations and networks, and how globalization and complexity are reshaping everything—from military strategy to how we live and work together.

The authors open with a personal story about their ancestral roots—two families from the Scottish-English borderlands, once isolated and disconnected, now spread across the globe yet still tied by shared history and trust. This story isn’t just sentimental. It introduces a key idea: networks have always existed. They aren’t new, but the way they function in today’s hyper-connected world is radically different.

The Rise of Networks and the Decline of Traditional Structures

What’s changed in the last decade or so is how quickly and easily people can connect across the globe. These connections allow groups—sometimes even dangerous ones—to bypass traditional, rule-based systems like governments or international institutions. If those systems can’t adapt, they collapse or get left behind. That’s not a theory; it’s happening already. Criminal organizations often operate more efficiently and adaptively than states. They fill the gaps left by weak governments, especially in developing nations. These aren’t just illegal groups—they’re networks, and they work because of trust, not rules.

Globalization: We’re All Connected (Like It or Not)

The authors stress that we can’t separate ourselves from what’s happening in the rest of the world. The Afghan poppy farmer growing opium is part of the same system as your local community. His work connects to public health, law enforcement, and even your taxes. Likewise, the desperate migrant crossing borders in search of a better life is tied to your job market and social systems. These aren’t isolated issues. They’re part of complex adaptive systems—networks that evolve, shift, and adapt regardless of our rules. Try to control them, and they’ll just find another way.

Trust vs. Rules: A Core Tension

Here’s one of the chapter’s biggest takeaways: networks form and survive because of trust. Formal organizations, by contrast, are built on rules. The problem is when these two fall out of sync. Rules that don’t reflect the trust people have in each other don’t work. And networks that lack any formal structure can’t scale or sustain themselves. The authors argue that we need both—trust to form real human bonds and rules to maintain them over time.

The example of the child soldier from Sierra Leone is especially powerful. He doesn’t live by the state’s laws because those laws have no meaning in his world. He survives by trusting the warlord and his group. It’s brutal, but logical. You can’t fix this by imposing rules. You have to change the environment that creates these networks in the first place.

Post-Modernism and Post-Belief

The chapter also digs into philosophy—not in an abstract way, but to show how deeply ideas shape organizations. The authors explore how we’ve moved from Modernism (one truth) to Post-Modernism (many truths), and now possibly to something even more unsettling: Post-Belief. That’s when people no longer share a common belief system at all. In such a world, rules lose their meaning because there’s no trust or shared belief to hold them up. The network becomes hollow, even dangerous.

Europe vs. the U.S.: Two Approaches to Trust and Belief

Europe, the authors suggest, has pooled its trusts into a belief in peace, creating a system of rules designed to avoid conflict. But this has also created tensions, especially between older and newer European states. The U.S., by contrast, still holds to strong beliefs—God, country, freedom—and acts based on those shared convictions. That makes its networks and rules more aligned, at least in theory.

Why Networks and Formal Organizations Need Each Other

You can’t have a functioning system that’s just a network or just a formal organization. They need each other. Networks are about flexibility, relationships, and quick response. Formal organizations are about stability, accountability, and infrastructure. We all belong to both kinds of groups: family and church networks, but also jobs and banks. These things coexist—and over time, shape who we are.

The Military Example: It’s All About Trust

In the military, it’s trust that keeps people going in life-or-death situations—not rules. Soldiers don’t go to battle just because of their contracts. They fight because they trust the people next to them. That’s a network. But it’s backed by a formal organization that pays salaries, plans logistics, and coordinates action. One doesn’t work without the other.

Looking Ahead: Complexity Is the New Normal

Finally, the chapter warns that the world is more complex and connected than ever. 9/11 changed everything. There was no warning time. No traditional declaration of war. The old models of threat assessment no longer work. In today’s battlespace, networks can’t be “controlled”—they can only be understood, influenced, and navigated. That takes agility, trust, and a new kind of leadership.

In short, this chapter lays the foundation for everything that follows. It makes a bold claim: if we want to deal with today’s challenges—whether in war, politics, or business—we need to stop relying only on rigid systems and start understanding how people really connect, trust, and work together in networks. That’s where the real power lies.

Chapter 2 – Complexity: New Insights into Systems and Networks

This chapter is all about helping us see the world in a new way—through the lens of complexity. The authors take us on a journey from history to science, from ecosystems to warfare, to explain how systems behave when things aren’t neat, linear, or easily controlled.

A Shift in Global Patterns

The chapter starts by revisiting globalization—not as an abstract economic idea, but as the growing mesh of interactions that cut across old boundaries. In the past, religious and political zones stayed mostly separate, held together by frontiers. But over time, especially from the 19th century onward, migrations, wars, and global shifts blurred those lines. The 20th century, shaped by wars and the Cold War, slowed these interactions down. But now, everything is reconnected—and messier than ever.

As the world opens up again, the authors warn that we’re entering a new kind of global environment. Networks are forming across legal and illegal lines, governments and non-states, often with no clear center or control. And some of these networks are dangerously effective.

Why Simple Models No Longer Work

We humans tend to rely on familiar models. For centuries, the Newtonian worldview dominated: if we knew the starting point of every particle, we could predict the future. But the real world doesn’t behave that way. Most systems are open—they constantly exchange energy and information with their surroundings. That means unpredictability, non-linearity, and emergence.

To illustrate this, the authors use a brilliant metaphor: a pan of water on a stove. At first, it just sits there. But as heat flows in, structures called Benard cells form—order emerges from energy input. Add more heat, and it turns to chaos—boiling water, turbulence, global disorder. This is how complex systems behave: they self-organize, they transform, and small changes can lead to huge effects.

Self-Organizing Ecosystems

The same principles apply to nature. Imagine an ecosystem where each species interacts with a few others. If one species weakens, it can trigger a ripple effect—its neighbors must adapt. This “local coevolution” builds up into massive, unpredictable shifts across the system. The authors model this using grids and fitness landscapes, showing how small local changes cascade into large-scale transformations. The system isn’t just chaotic—it’s complex, meaning that the whole is more than the sum of its parts.

What’s fascinating here is that complexity doesn’t lead to randomness—it leads to patterns. Systems self-organize into critical states where small nudges can cause massive avalanches. This is a key insight: complexity creates systems that are both ordered and unpredictable.

The Sandpile Lesson

A sandpile is another metaphor. You add grains one by one. At first, nothing happens. But once the slope reaches a tipping point, one more grain causes a sudden avalanche. Most avalanches are small, but occasionally, a giant one occurs. This is a perfect example of a complex adaptive system. It looks calm—until it’s not.

These systems often follow what’s called a power law: small events are common, big ones are rare—but possible. And when we plot these behaviors, they often form fractals: patterns that look the same at every scale. This means complex systems aren’t random—they have structure, just not the kind we’re used to.

Key Properties of Complexity

The authors summarize six key traits of complex systems:

1. Nonlinear interaction – small inputs can lead to big outcomes.
2. Decentralized control – no one is in charge, yet order emerges.
3. Self-organization – structure arises without a central plan.
4. Non-equilibrium order – these systems thrive far from stability.
5. Coevolution – parts of the system evolve together, affecting each other.
6. Collectivist dynamics – local actions ripple outward.

What About Humans?

This isn’t just theory—it applies to people. Think of informal workgroups that form to solve a crisis. No one tells them what to do. They just organize themselves around a goal. This is self-organization, and it’s where innovation often happens. The authors point out that in military settings, good commanders have long understood this: you give intent and constraints, and let local units adapt.

From Industrial Age to Information Age

This leads to one of the most interesting parts of the chapter: how military and commercial organizations are evolving. Just like businesses moved from rigid hierarchies to flat, agile networks, the military is adopting network-centric warfare. This means giving more autonomy to units at the edge, letting them act based on shared awareness. It’s a shift from command-and-control to self-synchronization—again, a principle rooted in complexity.

The Core Idea of Complexity

Professor Gell-Mann’s etymology of “complexity” is a great touch—derived from the Latin for “braided together.” Complexity is about connections. Every decision in one part of the system affects every other part. And those effects vary based on each part’s history, structure, and state. So when something changes, it doesn’t just adapt—it coevolves with everything around it.

Understanding Networks

The chapter dives into network types:

• Random Networks (like dots connected by dice rolls) behave predictably, until they hit a sudden tipping point.
• Small World Networks are what we live in—highly clustered, but with surprising shortcuts connecting distant parts. Think “six degrees of separation.”
• Scale-Free Networks grow through preferential attachment—the rich get richer. Think of the internet, where a few sites get tons of links. These are robust to random failures but fragile to targeted attacks on the hubs.

Real-World Impact: The Falklands Example

To make all this real, the chapter ends with a story from the Falklands War. The author was asked to analyze how to damage Port Stanley’s runway. His informal, trust-based network in the Ministry of Defence worked around the clock to deliver insights to the War Cabinet. They chose to drop 21 bombs. One hit—and that one hit triggered a cascade of effects. Argentina pulled back jets to defend its mainland. British ships faced less threat. Morale shifted. Politics shifted. All from one targeted decision. That’s complexity in action.

In short, this chapter gives us a toolkit for understanding the messy, interconnected world we live in. It argues that we need to stop looking for single causes and instead understand how small, local changes can ripple out to shape entire systems. Whether in nature, war, business, or society, complexity is the new reality—and the only way to stay effective is to embrace it.

Chapter 3 – Policy Through Change

This chapter explores how formal institutions and informal networks come together during moments of profound change. Using rich historical examples—especially Churchill’s leadership during WWII—it shows how agility, trust, and structure interact in complex systems like governments, militaries, and societies.

When change is urgent, evolution isn’t enough

The chapter opens with a sharp observation: change usually unfolds gradually, unless a crisis forces us to change fast. Britain’s transformation during WWII is the main case in point. From empire to commonwealth, independence to co-dependence, private to national, Britain reorganized nearly every part of society. Orwell had predicted that such a moment would require a coming together of left and right politics. It happened—and this shift wasn’t just political, but deeply institutional.

Formal organizations vs. informal networks

The authors define formal organizations as rule-based, hierarchical, and linear—think ministries, armies, or large bureaucracies. Networks, on the other hand, are trust-based, decentralized, and flexible. These two systems work differently, but they need each other. One holds power; the other distributes it. One provides scale and structure; the other creates movement and effect.

A key idea here is that networks create effects from the potential energy held by formal institutions. They act like conductors, translating power into action—especially in fast-moving or uncertain contexts.

The layered structure of state power

The chapter breaks down how defense (and by analogy, other government functions) operates across four levels:

• Grand strategy: where vision, goals, and high-level resources are set.
• Strategy: where those goals are shaped into actionable plans.
• Operations: where plans become coordinated actions.
• Tactics: where the work gets done on the ground.

In theory, this cascade works neatly. But in practice, the authors note that things get messy, especially in democratic systems with short policy cycles. Governments may have just two years to implement changes before the next election. That’s barely enough time to build trust, let alone deliver impact.

Trust is essential—but not guaranteed

Formal organizations don’t require trust to function. They’re designed to operate even when trust is low—as seen with Nixon’s administration after Watergate. But for them to succeed during turbulent times or transitions, trust becomes vital. A newly elected government must trust the civil and military services; otherwise, it cannot govern effectively. The chapter points out that in systems like the UK or US, the civil service is loyal not to the ruling party but to the head of state—ensuring continuity.

However, problems arise when this system is undermined. The appointment of “special advisers” loyal only to political figures, rather than the state, erodes the trust-based neutrality that formal systems rely on to function across administrations.

Churchill’s return: power, trust, and networks

Churchill’s leadership during WWII is used as a case study in how networks and formal institutions come together in moments of great change. When Churchill returned to government in 1939, he wasn’t particularly trusted by the establishment. But the urgency of war demanded action, and his personal network, vision, and energy helped mobilize the broader system.

He built informal coalitions across party lines and worked with people who weren’t part of the traditional power structure. His leadership shows how someone with little formal support can still create powerful effects if they’re trusted by the right networks—and if formal organizations are willing to “bless” them.

Formal organizations preserve rules. Networks play the game.

There’s a great metaphor in this chapter: formal organizations are about playing the rules, while networks are about playing the game. Think of a football club (formal organization) and its team (network). The club exists year-round, whether games are being played or not. But the team forms and dissolves depending on the season and the players involved. If the club ceases to exist, the team has nowhere to go. If the team dissolves, the club still survives.

This idea helps explain how governments and institutions manage change. Networks are built to handle complexity and rapid response. But they need the legal, financial, and logistical backing of formal organizations to endure and make an impact.

The Battle of the Atlantic: complexity in action

One of the most compelling parts of the chapter is how the Battle of the Atlantic is used to explain these dynamics. Germany needed to disrupt Allied shipping through precise attacks on choke points. To do that, it required an integrated campaign involving intelligence, politics, military strategy, and accurate assessments of effectiveness—not just sunk tonnage.

Britain, under Churchill, responded not by centralizing everything, but by empowering networks—Bletchley Park, dispersed manufacturing centers, and transportation systems. These networks weren’t created from scratch. They were blessed by formal institutions and supported by Churchill’s personal trust and influence.

Unlike Nazi Germany, where fear and rigid hierarchy stifled communication, Britain’s approach allowed for adaptation, self-organization, and a shared sense of purpose. Churchill’s “command intent” gave meaning and coherence across levels, enabling people to take initiative without waiting for orders.

Experimentation and agility

Toward the end, the chapter highlights the idea of experimentation. The Mulberry Harbors—portable docks built to support the Normandy landings—are a case study. Churchill bypassed formal structures to support a risky, innovative project led by a junior officer. The result? A critical success that enabled the D-Day invasion.

But not every experiment worked. One of the docks failed during a storm. Why? Possibly due to cultural differences in execution between British and American teams. This raises an important point: experimentation isn’t just about technical testing—it must include soft factors like culture, interpretation, and trust.

In short, this chapter shows that effective policy-making in complex environments isn’t about perfect plans or rigid control. It’s about creating the right mix of formal structure and informal networks, empowering experimentation, and maintaining trust across every level. When these things align, even the most daunting challenges—like total war—can be met with agility and resilience.

Chapter 4 – Informal Networks

This chapter explores what informal networks really are, how they form, and why they matter so much inside organizations. It breaks down their structure, behavior, and role in agility—showing how they interact with formal systems and why both are needed for an organization to truly adapt and thrive.

What exactly is an informal network?

The authors define informal networks as groups of people who stay connected because it’s mutually beneficial. These aren’t formal teams or departments. They’re human, trust-based relationships that share information, ideas, and context. A node is a person, and a link is the trust between two people. These networks thrive in spaces where formal systems don’t move fast enough—or where bureaucracy blocks action. They’re the “underground routes” that often get things done when red tape would slow everything down.

Even though they’re called “informal,” they follow patterns. Members share information, but each interprets it through their own lens, shaped by personal experiences, mental models, and beliefs. So even in high-trust networks, people don’t all see things the same way.

How do they form and who decides?

Nobody assigns people to informal networks. They form naturally. Management can’t dictate who joins, but it can shape the environment to encourage them. When managers genuinely listen, value relationships, and build a culture of connection, people self-organize. That’s where the magic happens.

But there’s a twist. As networks grow and need to make decisions, the question shifts from “Who is in the network?” to “Who decides?” In stable environments—where tasks are repetitive and predictable—decisions are made through clear roles, boundaries, and rules. Think of a car production line churning out identical models. But in today’s volatile world, organizations must move beyond that. Instead of strict control, they need teams that negotiate, adapt, and self-organize.

A management matrix for modern times

To make sense of this, the authors introduce a helpful 2×2 matrix. One axis is the external environment—stable or turbulent. The other is management style—tight or loose. A tightly coupled system works fine in a stable world. But in unpredictable, high-speed contexts, a loosely coupled system that empowers informal networks becomes essential. That’s where agility comes from. Instead of controlling everything from the top down, management must let go and trust networks to do their job.

Can we prove that informal networks add value?

Yes—and this part gets technical, but it’s fascinating. The authors use information entropy—a concept from information theory—to explain. Entropy measures uncertainty. In simple terms, the more connected and informed your network is, the less uncertainty you face.

They use a logistics example from military operations. In a push model, one decision-maker controls everything and pushes resources based on a plan. In a pull model, decisions are distributed across the network, and everyone shares information and adapts. The pull model reduces entropy, meaning there’s greater shared understanding, better coordination, and faster response. That’s the power of informal networks in action.

Different types of informal networks

The authors break down three major types:

1. Random Networks: These happen by accident—people bumping into each other at the coffee machine. The key is accessibility and mobility. The more people move and mix, the more these networks form. They’re good for spreading ideas but don’t have a clear structure.
2. Small World Networks: Here, people are grouped in tight clusters, but with a few long-distance links connecting them. Think “six degrees of separation.” These networks are efficient: you get high local trust with global reach. Managers can encourage these by connecting distant teams with shortcuts.
3. Scale Free Networks: These are built around hubs—individuals who have lots of connections. The “rich get richer.” The internet is a classic example. If a new person joins and connects to a hub, that hub becomes even more powerful. These networks are efficient but fragile. If a hub goes down, the system suffers.

A journey through complexity, history, and wine

In classic Atkinson and Moffat style, the chapter shifts into a historical exploration of how networks evolve. They use the trade of wool and wine to show how informal networks can evolve into formal organizations. From the wool trade driving British alliances with Portugal (hello, Port wine), to the invention of Champagne requiring new kinds of glass, to the industrial shifts that sparked global migrations—these are examples of how trade and trust networks shape formal systems over time.

Religion also plays a role. The Roman Catholic Church acted as a formal hub, trying to control all networks. But informal, often “heretic” networks emerged alongside it—sometimes supporting, sometimes opposing. The Inquisition, surprisingly, learned to target the hubs of these rogue networks to shut them down more efficiently. It’s a lesson in how power and influence travel through networks, not just commands.

The cycle of network evolution

All of this leads to what the authors call the Hypothesis of Network Evolution. It goes like this:

• Informal networks often start as Scale Free—growing around powerful hubs.
• As they get bigger, they need structure. They evolve into Small World Networks—local clusters with shortcuts.
• Eventually, if they’re to persist and manage growth, they formalize. They create rules and roles, becoming formal organizations.
• Some parts fade, others split off and start new networks, and the cycle repeats.

Sometimes, a network becomes so dominant that it forms a Bose-Einstein condensation—a dense hub where almost everyone is connected to one super-node. These “star networks” can be incredibly powerful. The authors suggest Microsoft’s dominance is one example, and they connect this idea to economic theories from Adam Smith, Von Hayek, and Ronald Coase.

Trust, rules, and market dynamics

The market, like a network, only works if it’s trusted. When trust breaks down, rules step in. But rules are inflexible and can’t adjust quickly. That’s why informal networks are so vital—they bring agility, trust, and the ability to adapt in ways that formal structures can’t manage alone.

Are we getting closer or drifting apart?

The chapter ends with a thoughtful reflection. The Peace of Westphalia created the modern idea of the state, international law, and the separation of church and politics. But it was also a compromise—an acceptance that new networks had formed and needed to be acknowledged, not crushed. The authors suggest that today’s global systems—especially the West and Islamic worlds—still need to figure out how to broker trust between very different networks and rule systems.

In short, this chapter explains how informal networks drive agility, how they evolve into formal structures, and why both are essential. It’s a rich blend of systems theory, history, and insight—showing us that in any organization, the real power often flows through the relationships that aren’t written down, but are deeply trusted.

Chapter 5 – Social Linkage and Dynamics

This chapter digs into how enterprises create real-world effects—not just through command and policy, but through influence, perception, and adaptability. It builds on the earlier chapters and gives us a framework to understand how social, cognitive, and physical factors all interact within complex systems.

What is an enterprise, really?

We often think of an enterprise as a business or an organization, but the authors stretch this idea. From a social view, it’s a purposeful collective of people. From a complexity perspective, it’s an open system with energy and information flowing in and out. Economically, it’s a network of units that cluster together when it reduces costs. The point is: an enterprise isn’t static. It’s a dynamic, evolving thing—especially in the shift from the Industrial Age to the Information Age. The more empowered and self-organizing the structure, the more agile it becomes.

Stakeholder perception: where understanding begins

One of the most insightful parts of the chapter is how it breaks down the “stakeholder perception space.” Every stakeholder—whether internal or external—has values, objectives, and their own take on what’s happening. They don’t just see the world differently; they behave based on those perceptions. And those perceptions change over time.

The authors introduce four key attributes that shape how each stakeholder thinks and acts:

• Values and trust – the foundational beliefs and mutual credibility.
• Commitment to objectives – how strongly they’re driven to reach their goals.
• Current situational assessment – how they understand the present.
• Predictive situational assessment – what they expect to happen next.

If you’re thinking this sounds psychological, you’re right. Influence starts not with pushing orders but with shaping how people see the world and what they believe is possible. That’s why understanding stakeholders deeply is central to good policy-making.

The effects space: actions ripple outward

The authors shift from perception to effects—the changes we try to create in the world. Effects don’t just land in one spot. They ripple through different domains: physical, informational, cognitive, and social. A military airstrike, for instance, may not just destroy a target—it could shift public opinion, create fear or defiance, or sway political power. The real skill is in understanding these ripple effects, predicting where they’ll go, and influencing outcomes through carefully chosen actions.

It’s not about direct control. It’s about shaping environments and allowing effects to cascade in your favor.

Networks, complexity, and indirect influence

At the heart of this cascade is the influence network—a web of actors, ideas, and interactions that form the “world outside the enterprise.” This network behaves like a complex adaptive system. You can’t predict every reaction, and you won’t get one clean result. Instead, a single intervention creates a chain of outcomes, some of which you expect—and some you don’t.

The authors revisit the Falklands War example to show how one decision—a bombing raid—had cascading effects: from Argentina moving its planes, to boosting British morale, to reshaping political dynamics. This is how small, well-timed actions can unlock huge strategic effects.

Managing complexity through agility

The chapter brings in Ashby’s Law of Requisite Variety—a classic idea from cybernetics. The message is simple: to manage a complex system, your management style must be just as flexible as the system you’re trying to control. If the system is highly dynamic and unpredictable, you need agile leadership. Rigid hierarchies won’t cut it.

In the Industrial Age, organizations handled this mismatch by simplifying themselves—dividing into silos and doing narrow tasks well. But in today’s world, we need agility throughout. That means broad collaboration, information sharing, and decision-making that keeps pace with constant change.

Don’t fall into chaos

There’s a warning, though. If complexity and change outpace an enterprise’s ability to adapt, it risks slipping into what the authors call the Region of Chaos. It’s the danger zone where systems become unstable. You either have to retreat into old, rigid systems (and risk irrelevance) or learn how to ride that edge—where innovation and breakthrough often happen.

Directive vs. emergent control

Here the authors explore two modes of managing:

• Directive control is planned, top-down, and based on predicted paths.
• Emergent control is responsive, local, and shaped by what’s happening in real time.

Real-world organizations use a mix of both. The challenge is knowing when to shift the balance. In fast-changing environments, more control must move to the edges—where people on the ground can make fast, smart decisions.

The book cleverly compares this to turning a dial: sometimes you need strong central direction (turn the dial toward 1), other times you need distributed flexibility (turn it to 0). Different parts of an organization might have that dial set differently at any given time.

Understanding influence networks at deeper levels

The final section breaks down how we can analyze networks at three levels:

1. Base level – The structure: who’s connected to whom. Are we dealing with random, small-world, or scale-free networks? What’s the vulnerability if a key node drops out? What’s the average distance between nodes?
2. Median level – The behavior: how information or stress spreads. For instance, if one node fails, does that pressure overload others? Do we see cascading failures?
3. Top level – The effects: how do shared decisions and behaviors emerge? Especially in military contexts, this might be seen in how commanders align their thinking and actions through information sharing.

The authors even draw from information entropy to show how aligned (or misaligned) a group is. High entropy means confusion and fragmentation; low entropy means shared understanding.

In short, this chapter weaves together systems theory, policy-making, psychology, and cybernetics to show how real-world decisions create effects through influence networks. The key isn’t rigid control, but the ability to understand, predict, and shape how perceptions and actions ripple through connected systems. That’s what agility really means in a complex world.

Chapter 6 – New Order: New Effects

This chapter brings together everything we’ve explored so far—complexity, networks, informal systems, and agility—and applies it to how modern operations are planned and executed. It centers around a concept called Effects Based Operations (EBO), which is a way of thinking and acting in complex environments by creating effects that ripple across systems, not just strike targets.

Effects aren’t just about impact—they’re about change

The heart of this chapter is about moving from a traditional view of operations (where you hit a target and hope it works) to a more layered view where you aim to change behavior, influence systems, and shape the environment. The goal isn’t just to destroy something—it’s to create a specific outcome by triggering a cascade of effects.

This thinking traces back to Colonel John Warden during the Gulf War, who imagined the enemy as concentric “rings” of influence. His strategy was to attack multiple parts of the system simultaneously—shock and awe—to cause rapid collapse. That same idea has since evolved into what’s now known as EBO.

The six views of Effects Based Operations

The chapter outlines six different but related ways to understand EBO:

1. Planning – Linking strategy to tasks through Effects Based Planning.
2. Targeting – Choosing targets based on the systemic effects they will cause.
3. National Power – Using diplomatic, military, and economic tools together.
4. Shock and Awe – Coordinated rapid strikes to cause systemic collapse.
5. Command Interaction – Operational commanders collaborating across domains to deal with complexity.
6. Systemic Conflict – Understanding warfare as a clash between complex adaptive systems, with unpredictable and far-reaching consequences.

The key insight is that effects in physical systems are like dominoes—you can map them out. But in cognitive and psychological systems, it’s more like tossing a ping-pong ball into a room full of mousetraps. You can’t predict every outcome, but you know it will spread.

Why experimentation matters

With this level of complexity, the chapter argues that you can’t just plan on paper—you have to experiment. Both the U.S. and U.K. are using experiments not only to test technologies but to explore how concepts like EBO and Network Centric Warfare actually work in practice. Experimentation becomes a continuous cycle, involving scientists, military leaders, and even industry. It’s about learning how complex systems behave and adjusting strategy accordingly.

In the U.S., this transformation is top-down: the four military branches operate separately and come together at the strategic level. In the U.K., it’s more bottom-up, with integrated planning and shared budgets across services. The result? Both nations aim for similar outcomes—agile, effective forces—but take different routes based on their political and economic structures.

Real effects need cross-department coordination

A major theme here is that military power alone isn’t enough. The Kosovo campaign showed that airstrikes alone couldn’t achieve political goals. What’s needed is integration across departments—diplomacy, economics, military—to align strategy and achieve true outcomes. But this is hard because different departments often operate at different levels and timelines.

For instance, the military operates across all levels—from ground troops (tactical) to defense ministers (strategic). Other government departments, like the Home Office or Treasury, don’t work this way. That means it’s tough to coordinate grand strategies without clear connections across the system.

Case studies that bring it all to life

The chapter shares powerful examples of EBO in the real world:

• The 2000 UK Fuel Strike – A few citizens, connected through mobile phones and the internet, blockaded fuel terminals and nearly shut down the economy. A small, agile, networked group created a massive national effect. This was EBO in action—without bullets or bombs.
• The Foot and Mouth Crisis – The disease spread rapidly, and the ministry in charge failed to act quickly. Local vets and the armed forces eventually took control at the tactical level and built agile local networks to contain the outbreak. Again, informal networks filled the gap where formal systems stumbled.
• SARS and Political Control – In China, political hesitancy delayed action against SARS. In contrast, Hong Kong’s more open system allowed early response. It showed that control from the top doesn’t always work—and trust, speed, and local autonomy are crucial in a crisis.

Command vs. Control: A vital distinction

One of the richest parts of this chapter is its reflection on Command and Control (C2). Often treated as a single concept, the authors break them apart:

• Command is about intent, trust, and guiding action—like setting a direction and letting your team figure out how to get there.
• Control is about rules, oversight, and regulation—managing risk and ensuring compliance.

In the modern world, especially with complex adaptive systems, you can’t control everything. But you can influence and guide. That’s the essence of command in complexity.

The chapter draws from history—like Truman vs. MacArthur in the Korean War—to show how confusion between command and control can have major consequences. It also reminds us that modern conflicts are transparent: everything from strategy to operations plays out under public and global scrutiny. Commanders can no longer act in isolation from political objectives.

The new model: Delegated Autonomous Command

To deal with complexity, the authors propose a new model: Delegated Autonomous Command. It means pushing decision-making down to the lowest capable level—trusting corporals and lieutenants to act based on intent, not waiting for orders. This builds agility and responsiveness into the system.

The British forces already do this well, allowing local leaders to make calls based on what’s happening. The U.S., historically more centralized, has begun adapting too—especially in Iraq and Afghanistan, where field leaders now play a bigger role in shaping strategy on the ground.

Agility as a core capability

Agility isn’t just a nice-to-have—it’s a requirement in a complex world. The chapter introduces a compelling idea: different organizations have different agility curves. The British military has strong lower-level agility (corporals and squads), while the U.S. shows more agility at the senior levels (command and policy). Both have lessons to learn from each other.

If the British higher levels can become more adaptive—and the Americans push autonomy downward—both systems can evolve into truly agile forces.

In short, this chapter argues that modern challenges require a new mindset—one built around effects, not just actions; networks, not just hierarchies; and command through trust, not control through rules. The more we embrace this complexity, the more effective and adaptable our organizations become. That’s the future of agility.

Chapter 7 – Back to the Future

This final chapter brings the book full circle, offering a deep reflection on what leadership, command, and cooperation must look like in the complex and unpredictable world we now live in. It makes a bold call: we need to stop trying to control everything and start building trust-based networks that can adapt, self-organize, and act decisively—even when rules break down.

From Industrial Age control to Information Age agility

The authors begin by revisiting the shift from the rigid, top-down command structures of the Industrial Age to the fluid, distributed realities of the Information Age. In the past, command was based on Directed Control—strict chains of command within narrow bureaucratic silos. This worked as long as everyone followed the same playbook. But when the rules were challenged—by globalization, rapid information flows, and non-state threats—this structure started to crack.

Many states, especially those unable to evolve past central control and outdated practices, began to fail. By 2004, the authors argue, fewer than 50 of the world’s 200+ states exercised legitimate, accountable power in a way aligned with the vision of the 1945 Atlantic Charter.

The illusion of control through technology

A big idea here is the illusion that technology alone can restore control. Especially in the U.S., there’s a belief that better computers, video-conferencing, and bandwidth can fix coordination problems. In the U.K., there’s more skepticism and a belief that culture—not just tech—holds the answer. Both views influence how countries design their military and strategic systems.

But the authors warn: no matter how advanced the tools, they can’t replace the human core of command—trust, judgment, and intent.

A new kind of command

What’s needed now is Delegated Autonomous Command—where authority is pushed down to lower levels, enabling quicker, decentralized action. But this only works if trust flows both ways: subordinates must trust that they are empowered to act, and leaders must trust that their intent will be carried out without micromanaging.

This shift is not about letting go of structure but about bounding it. Rather than rigid control, boundaries are shaped by a shared understanding of purpose. People interact laterally, filling in gaps and resolving issues not by strict rules, but through confidence and trust in one another.

From stovepipes to communities of interest

The chapter dives into how military headquarters have historically been organized—around functional stovepipes like logistics, operations, and planning. These were expanded over time, often without improving effectiveness. By the 21st century, these structures became slow, inefficient, and ill-suited for the interconnected reality of modern conflict.

Plans were developed in linear, isolated steps with little interaction across teams. Political and legal advisors were often brought in too late. In alliance settings like NATO, national interests often took precedence over true integration, slowing things down even more.

Instead of building better stovepipes, the authors argue for a move toward communities of interest—bounded networks that can act more fluidly, collaboratively, and adaptively across civil, military, and political domains.

From consent to concessive decision-making

A powerful concept introduced here is the shift from consent to concessive decision-making. In traditional alliances, decisions are made through consensus—everyone agrees, often slowly and cautiously. But in fast-paced environments, this can be paralyzing.

Concessive decision-making is based on trust. It allows individuals or units to act independently within agreed bounds, signaling their intentions unless told otherwise. This model values initiative and enables faster, more responsive action without always needing formal approval.

Nelson’s leadership at the Battle of Trafalgar is used as a vivid example. Despite having limited direct communication, Nelson’s captains knew exactly what to do because of shared intent, strong bonds, and mutual trust. His fleet acted like a well-coordinated network—long before such language existed.

Institutional friction and broken communication

The authors also explore institutional friction—what happens when formal systems and informal networks stop talking to each other. The Columbia Space Shuttle disaster is used as a painful example. NASA’s engineers knew something was wrong, but the truth got stuck in unofficial emails and unread PowerPoint slides. There was no trusted, integrated way to move critical information across the hierarchy. The systems didn’t interact, and people paid the price.

This lesson matters far beyond NASA. It’s a warning for any organization trying to combine formal rules with informal networks without understanding how to connect them properly.

Trust as the foundation of future cooperation

At the heart of it all is trust—not just within teams, but across nations, services, and cultures. The authors explain how recent coalitions (like in Afghanistan and Iraq) relied heavily on trust between a few key players (notably the U.S., U.K., and Australia). These small-world networks were effective because they were built on shared experience and values, not just formal agreements.

But trust isn’t something you can build in the middle of a crisis. It has to be developed in peacetime—through joint training, cultural exchange, and open collaboration. Without it, cooperation breaks down and the burden falls unevenly on those doing the heavy lifting.

Final reflections on law, power, and peace

The chapter closes with a historical perspective, tracing international law from the Peace of Westphalia to today. That agreement formalized the modern state system and introduced the idea of rules between states. But as the world changes, that model struggles to keep up. Non-state actors, criminal networks, and failed states have created a vacuum where the old rules don’t apply.

The authors argue that international law needs to evolve, becoming more connected, adaptive, and able to interact with diverse systems. Just as organizations must move from rule-based to trust-based models, so too must global governance.

In short, this chapter is a call to action. To face the future, we must stop clinging to outdated ideas of control and embrace new models of trust, agility, and interconnectedness. Command becomes less about orders and more about purpose. Cooperation becomes less about rules and more about shared intent. And success depends not on how well we follow the old paths—but on how well we navigate the complex, adaptive networks that shape our world.

4 Key Ideas from The Agile Organization

6 Main Lessons from The Agile Organization

My Book Highlights & Quotes

People subconsciously retard their own intellectual growth. They come to rely on cliches and habits. Once they reach the age of their own personal comfort with the world, they stop learning and their mind runs idle for the rest of their days. They may progress organizationally, they may be ambitious and eager, and they may even work night and day. But they learn no more

One of the Scrum rules is that work cannot be pushed onto a team; the Product Owner offers items for the iteration, and the team pulls as many as they decide they can do at a sustainable pace with good quality

Conclusion

It doesn’t pretend the world is simple—but it helps you see the patterns and the people that actually make things work.

Whether you’re leading a team, navigating change, or just trying to understand how big systems tick, this book gives you language, clarity, and a lot of surprising insights.

It won’t give you a template—but it will give you something far more useful: the mindset to lead in the real world.

I am incredibly grateful that you have taken the time to read this post.

Support my work by sharing my content with your network using the sharing buttons below.

Want to show your support and appreciation tangibly?

Creating these posts takes time, effort, and lots of coffee—but it’s totally worth it!

If you’d like to show some support and help keep me stay energized for the next one, buying me a virtual coffee is a simple (and friendly!) way to do it.

Do you want to get new content in your Email?

Do you want to explore more?

Check my main categories of content below:

• Book Notes
• Career Development
• Essays
• Explaining
• Leadership
• Lean and Agile
• Management
• Personal Development
• Project Management
• Reading Insights
• Technology

Navigate between the many topics covered in this website:

Agile Art Artificial Intelligence Blockchain Books Business Business Tales C-Suite Career Coaching Communication Creativity Culture Cybersecurity Decision Making Design DevOps Digital Transformation Economy Emotional Intelligence ESG Feedback Finance Flow Focus Gaming Generative AI Goals GPT Habits Harvard Health History Innovation Kanban Large Language Models Leadership Lean Learning LeSS Machine Learning Magazine Management Marketing McKinsey Mentorship Metaverse Metrics Mindset Minimalism MIT Motivation Negotiation Networking Neuroscience NFT Ownership Paper Parenting Planning PMBOK PMI PMO Politics Portfolio Management Productivity Products Program Management Project Management Readings Remote Work Risk Management Routines Scrum Self-Improvement Self-Management Sleep Social Media Startups Strategy Team Building Technology Time Management Volunteering Web3 Work

Do you want to check previous Book Notes? Check these from the last couple of weeks:

• Book Notes #126: Inevitable by Mike Colias2025-03-24
• Book Notes #125: Revenge of the Tipping Point by Malcolm Gladwell2025-03-21
• Book Notes #124: Radical Candor by Kim Scott2024-09-04
• Book Notes #123: The Personal MBA by Josh Kaufman2024-05-09
• Book Notes #122: The First 20 Hours by Josh Kaufman2024-05-02

Support my work by sharing my content with your network using the sharing buttons below.

Want to show your support tangibly? A virtual coffee is a small but nice way to show your appreciation and give me the extra energy to keep crafting valuable content! Pay me a coffee: