Kubernetik-Workshop – not the right thing for everyone

In September 2019, the Future-Academy [The Future Academy X – Awakening Human Potential… at Startup-Incubator wayra [Germany] invited to a crossover session. 50 participants created an important Kubernetik workshop in one hour on a private or professional “How can I…” question.

Cübernetics Workshop at YOTX Academy in Telefonica Inkubator wayra
Cübernetics Workshop at YOTX Academy in Telefonica Inkubator wayra

Anhand des Kubernetik-Canvas all worked out their 3 answer-sentences to their complex self-asked question.

Crossover workshop

By now, I conduct weekly workshops on topics related to Kubernetik. Whether for founders, companies or in Meetups. Individual participants or small teams work on their complex questions, in which they are led step by step through the 16-step process.

Learnings

I find it exciting that patterns are emerging in the meantime, whom the Kubernetik will help and how. It doesn’t matter if someone has a private problem or wants to grasp and control the complexity as a manager or employee of a company.

Thus subjectively, it seems that one third is completely flashed of the Kubernetik and the tool is regarded as a holy grail. The feedback shows that many of them use the Kubernetik independently without instructions afterwards.

The second third finds it interesting, according to “aha, interesting, now I also know“. This group will presumably, without a coach, not again actively use Kubernetik for complex questions.

The rest is “lost” – at least after a certain step. Usually at step 2 and 3, i.e. finding nouns and prefixes. Before we really start with the Kubernetik.

Who is the right target group for the tool Kubernetik?

It is clear that people who have not yet been able to solve a topic for themselves, but have thought a lot about it and have even created lists in writing, can work through the problem in speed mode. Because it is clear, the more reflected one has thought through a topic so far, the faster the nouns and prefixes come to mind. At some point these thoughts had already been thought in this way or similar. Mostly, however, not completely fixed in writing and certainly not considered in context.

So most people can very quickly think of influencing variables, why the ex was to blame that the relationship was ended.

From a certain point of thinking through and wanting to understand a problem something paradoxical happens: you are stuck with the many things, options, dangers, open questions. So it can happen that the reflected person does not come into action. He stands in his own way and is stuck. Therefore, for these people in particular, Kubernetik is the ultimate way out. The method gives the user the possibility to collect all thoughts in a structured way – so it was nothing for nothing so far – to arrange them and bring them into mutual relationship. And then comes the magic: mathematics helps to raise the problem emotionlessly from a bird’s eye perspective to a neutral level. Thus it offers a way out. The result is a better understanding of the respective complexity. This results in the ability to act, since the easy to calculate prioritization indicates in which order which influence quantity should be approached. However, insecure people already have mathematics of their challenges with 1st grade. It is striking that autodidactically inclined people who read many non-fiction books tend to be more courageous generalists. So far founders, entrepreneurs, coaches and advisors are therefore the core target group, which recognize and use the Kubernetik profitably for themself.

For whom is Kubernetik wrong?

People who live strongly in the present and the past, where problems float around in the head like in a loop, but never fix them in writing, experience shows that they can use the Kubernetik less for themselves. The complex problem is then usually not solved actively itself, but in an externally determined manner. The thoughts that revolve around an unsolved problem are usually emotional in nature. This can be recognized by the fact that sleep is restless for a long time. Due to the emotional blurring of the parameters influencing one’s own problem, these can hardly be grasped as terms. However, Kubernetik lives from the fact that it falls back on previous reflected thoughts and makes them short and concisely communicable. This is the only way to fix influencing variables in writing and to share them with other people in order to receive feedback. Only then can I consider the relationship of the influencing variables and find a way out.

Kubernetik is not for people who are not fundamentally willing to be able to act.

  Highly emotional people can’t do much with cübernetics in the beginning without a coach. My recommendation here: talk to someone more rational in your circle of friends or hire a coach. The coach discusses the complex problem with you. He attaches great importance to working out the relevant concepts together from the emotions and stories told. Then the first step is taken to really cope with the problem and the Kubernetik can be the tool of choice here.

406
Written By
More from Chris Eberl

Kompliziertheit vs. Komplexität

Zugegebenermaßen habe ich lange selbst Komplexität und Kompliziertheit, oder im Sprachgebrauch gern...
Read More