Beyond Fixed Frameworks: PRAGMAGILITY — A Context Bounded Triangle for Change Management

Authorship Notice: This work was developed with the assistance of Generative AI, guided by my original insights and prompts. Citations and references were generated through AI assistance. I acknowledge and honor all authors, mentors, and individuals whose ideas or shared knowledge have contributed directly or indirectly to the formation of this work.

In an age of accelerating change, organizations and institutions increasingly struggle to apply fixed frameworks. They face contexts where cause and effect shift, solutions become obsolete during rollout and stakeholder tensions intensify. From our recent DSE work, we propose this operating model: PRAGMAGILITY, a triangle bounded by “Context” with two invariant sides — Pragmatism and Agility — and a third side that is not fixed, but selected according to the contextual demand. This model draws deeply on preceding theory while offering a fresh mechanism for adaptive leadership and change.

Theoretical heritage

Our model builds on four foundational ideas:

• The Cynefin Framework of Dave Snowden, which emphasizes that different contexts (Clear, Complicated, Complex, Chaotic) require different management responses. Wikipedia+2Cense Ltd.+2

• The OODA Loop of John Boyd (Observe–Orient–Decide–Act), emphasizing rapid adaptation and continual sense-making in dynamic environments. Dau.edu+1

• The Law of Requisite Variety from W. Ross Ashby: the idea that a control system must have at least as much variety as the environment it seeks to regulate (“only variety can absorb variety”). edge.org+1

• The emerging field of Quantum Leadership (as popularized by Danah Zohar) — seeing organizations as quantum-like systems, poised at the edge of chaos, where uncertainty is not a bug but a feature. SpringerLink+1

The insight we discovered: the variable-third-side of bounded triangle

Our DSE process surfaced the following insight:

• Organizations already know they must be pragmatic (what works now) and agile (how we respond fast and adapt).

• But many change frameworks assume a fixed third lever: e.g., “innovation”, “transformation”, “culture”, “technology” etc.

• Instead, we found or at least took the initiative to articulate that the third side must be fluid — its selection is determined by contextual demand.

• Therefore, PRAGMAGILITY = Pragmatism + Agility + (Variable third side) — all bounded by Context (which shapes which third side emerges).

• In practice: the triangle may become (Pragmatism × Agility × Resonance) when focus is on stakeholder-fit; or (Pragmatism × Agility × Rigor) when focus is on system performance; or (Pragmatism × Agility × Reconciliation) when focus is internal culture and conflict resolution. The third side is not limited to these examples.

What makes this insight different and powerful?

1. Avoids one-size-fits-all traps: The Cynefin legacy reminds us that context matters. But many frameworks still set a single “third leg”. PRAGMAGILITY makes the third leg explicitly contextual.

2. Balances stability & adaptation: The invariant sides (Pragmatism, Agility) provide stability; the variable third side allows adaptation. This echoes Ashby’s law: the system must expand its repertoire (variety) to match environment variety.

3. Handles uncertainty as structure, not problem: By acknowledging that the triangle’s third side will collapse into specific form when context demands, we lean into quantum metaphors—uncertainty is latent potential, not missing data.

4. Operationalizes decision loops: The OODA loop invites rapid cycles; our triangle invites organizations to choose which lever (“third side”) to deploy in each cycle, thus speeding orientation and decision phases.

How to apply PRAGMAGILITY in organizational change

Step 1: Surface Context Boundaries — Map the bounding circle: e.g., external market shock, internal culture shift, merger integration.

Step 2: Fixed Sides Activation — Ensure Pragmatism (data-driven, what works now) and Agility (iterative, responsive, experiment oriented) are in place.

Step 3: Diagnose Contextual Demand — Ask: What is the real gap now? Is it stakeholder Resonance, internal Rigor, or relational Reconciliation (or another quality)?

Step 4: Choose Third Side — Pick the quality most demanded. That becomes the third side of the triangle.

Step 5: Act & Feedback — Run the triangle: Pragmatism + Agility + chosen third side. Then sense results. If context shifts, the third side may change — loop back to Step 3.

Step 6: Re-frame Third Side Over Time — As conditions evolve, the third side might morph: e.g., you started with Rigor, but now you need Resonance. The model accommodates this dynamically.

Implications & failure modes

• Failure to sense shift → you keep the wrong third side fixed (e.g., focusing on Rigor when what matters is Resonance) → triangle misaligns → change stalls.

• Neglecting Pragmatism or Agility → even if the third side is correct, the triangle wobbles: lack of pragmatism means “what works now” is ignored; lack of agility means response is slow or rigid.

• Ignoring context boundaries → when you assume universal applicability, the bounding circle is hidden — you apply a triangle without knowing the domain, which mirrors failure in Cynefin when one treats complex problems as simple ones.

Conclusion

PRAGMAGILITY offers a new lever for change and strategy: rather than adding more frameworks, it proposes a meta-framework — a triangle whose third side flexes per context, while two sides remain constant. It honors prior work (Cynefin, OODA, Requisite Variety, Quantum Leadership, Fuzzy Logic) yet advances a mechanism for greater adaptability in today’s volatile, complex world.

By making context explicit and turning the third side into a decision variable, organizations gain a tool to operate with both stability and adaptability, to collapse potential into purposeful action, to treat uncertainty as fuel rather than friction.

Expansion

Meta-Interpretation: The Convergence Point

What makes it revolutionary is that GenAI itself is the first medium capable of expressing this principle in practice:

• Each prompt = a contextual boundary.

• The model = superposition engine between 1 (known) and 0 (unknown).

• The output = context-collapsed resolution, resonant if aligned with the prompt boundary.

Thus, PRAGMAGILITY isn’t just a management model — it’s the operational geometry of generative intelligence.That’s both novel and revelatory.

Call to builders

“PRAGMAGILITY reveals/articulates the Practical Quantum Principle — a triadic operator where binary invariants (1 and 0) are contextually resolved into probabilistic outcomes within a bounded field of resonance. It bridges computation, cognition, and creation. Nest, layer and connect in as many ways you can imagine.”

References (AI generated)

• Snowden, D.J. & Boone, M.E. (2007). “A Leader’s Framework for Decision-Making.” Harvard Business Review. Harvard Business Review+1

• Snowden, D. (2000). “Cynefin: A Sense of Time and Place.” European Management Journal. ResearchGate

• Richards, C. (2011). “Boyd’s OODA Loop.” J. Addams & Partners. jaddams.com

• McIntosh, S.E. (2011). “John Boyd and the OODA Loop.” JSTOR. JSTOR

• Ashby, W.R. (1958). “Requisite Variety and its Implications.” Cybernetica. panarchy.org+1

• Zohar, D. (2016). The Quantum Leader: A Revolution in Business Thinking and Practice. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books. Internet Archive+1