Finite and Infinite Games LO10465

John O'Neill (jao@cook.dsto.gov.au)
Mon, 14 Oct 96 09:03:41 +1000

Replying to LO10449 --

By the way, my big problem with the sports coach metaphor is that it seems
to me that the stable, rule bound context of sport is the antithesis of an
environment in which OL is mandatory.

I agree and disagree :->

Individual games are stable and rule-bound. However, the sport itself is
ongoing with no articulated rules. Similarly, coaching individuals and
teams is also ongoing - there are no stable well established rules for how
to coach. The results of coaching, playing a game in a sport, are
manifestations of the sport in a point in time.

J.P. Carse has written a book called "Finite and Infinite Games" that
describes these differences. Finite games are rule-based, where the
objective is to "win" the game (and thus end the game). The rules actually
define the finite game (is soccer still soccer if players are allowed to
use sticks to hit the ball?).

Infinite games are ongoing, the aim is to keep the game going. Reasoning
about infinite games is NOT about processing rules, but about changing and
redefining boundaries. Finite games operate within well-defined
boundaries. Infinite games redefine the boundaries over time.

If you happen to follow the sport of rugby league, then you will be aware
that the "Super League" competition is all about redefining the boundaries
of the sport rugby league. The sport itself is ongoing, its manifestation
(the games - the rules) are changing.

Better examples of infinite games from a learning organisation perspective
include:

- managing a business
- defending Australia
- protecting the environment

Each of these cases is an infinite game, the aim is to keep the game
going. These games are manifested in points of time as finite games e.g.
managing a business becomes "gain a 50% market share by 1997", defending
Australia becomes "defeat the Kamarians", protecting the environment
becomes "ban CFCs".

In each of these cases, it should be clear that achieving the finite game,
does not mean the infinite game has been achieved - instead it simply is
manifested in a new way at a later point in time.

There has been quite a few threads on this list about corporate memory /
groupware / lotus notes / computer support collaborative work. Current
approaches to each of these forms of computer support for organisational
learning fails because they only support finite games, and they fail to
recognise that they are actually supporting people working in infinite
games (stay tuned next year for my PhD thesis which will address these
problems. :->).

John O'Neill
DSTO C3 Research Centre, Australia
email: John.ONeill@dsto.defence.gov.au

-- 

"John O'Neill" <jao@cook.dsto.gov.au>

Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>