We tend to collapse every challenging problem into one bucket called complex.
But not every problem is created equal. Some problems are complicated. Others are truly complex.
Confusing the two creates paralysis, excuses inaction, and leads to failed efforts.
Complicated problems
Complicated problems are those where:
There are many moving parts, sometimes stochastic or nonlinear, but the rules are stable.
Cause and effect can be mapped in principle, even if you need a lot of data, time, and expertise.
Solutions are repeatable once you’ve worked them out.
What works today will work tomorrow, unless the rules themselves are rewritten.
Examples: airplanes, AI systems, cryptography, weather modeling, tax codes, supply chains. All intricate, sometimes opaque, but ultimately bounded by fixed rules.
Complex problems
Complex problems are those where:
The problem space is adaptive, relational, self-organizing. The “rules” shift because the actors inside the system are alive and responding.
Cause and effect are only clear in hindsight.
No single solution is final; interventions change the system itself.
What works once might not work again because the problem space is no longer the same.
Examples: ecosystems, pandemics, social trust, political movements, cultures.
The test
Ask yourself:
1. Does the problem space change in response to my action?
If the problem space stays the same no matter what you do, it just requires effort or expertise to fix → Complicated.
If the problem space reorganizes itself in response to input, (e.g., people adapt, relationships shift, feedback loops trigger) → Complex.
2. Can the problem be fully decomposed into parts with known solutions?
If experts can map the steps, apply methods, and reliably repeat results → Complicated.
If the problem space keeps changing as you work, (perhaps even in response to your work) making yesterday’s solution obsolete today → Complex.
3. Does a solution scale predictably?
If a pilot or prototype, once proven, will mostly work at larger scale without major surprises → Complicated.
If scaling can create unforeseeable effects due to the changing problem space, (e.g., side effects, counter-adaptations, new resistance) → Complex.
This is a community of people thinking deeply and feeling a lot. You’re invited to be part of that. No pressure, just honesty.
Why this distinction matters
When we treat a complicated problem as complex, we act like it’s unsolvable when it isn’t. The “Powers that Be” love this move: they say “it’s too complex” when it’s merely difficult, inconvenient or not profitable. That’s the illusion of complexity.
When we treat a complex problem as complicated, we expect a neat solution. We roll out the blueprint, and when the system pushes back, we call it failure. That’s the trap of oversimplification.
The cost of misclassification is high. It either excuses power from acting, or it wastes energy chasing clean fixes that can’t hold.
Working with each
Complicated → Plan and execute. Bring in expertise, set milestones, control variance, measure outcomes.
Complex → Probe, sense, respond. Run small, diverse experiments. Watch closely for feedback. Amplify what helps, dampen what harms, adjust continuously.
The illusion of complexity is not that the world is simple. It’s that we confuse two very different categories of difficulty. Complicated problems deserve expertise. Complex problems require humility. The wisdom is knowing which is which.
Why this matters for activists
Movements often get stuck in the illusion of complexity. Those in power say, “this problem is too complex, nothing can be done.” That language creates paralysis. But once you learn to separate complicated from complex, you gain a lever.
If the problem is complicated, then there are experts, methods, and procedures that can be mobilized. The refusal to act isn’t about feasibility, it’s about will. You can create clarity by working towards a concrete plan or timeline. This clarifies whether excuses are more about a lack of sufficient desire to resolve the problem.
If the problem is complex, then waiting for a perfect master plan is the wrong move. The path opens by acting small and iteratively: running probes, learning from them, and scaling what works. Movements that stay in endless debate about “the one right solution” stall; movements that run safe-to-fail experiments generate momentum and evidence that shift the system.
One practical tactic: ask for the smallest possible step. What’s the first action that would indicate progress? If it’s complicated, you’ll get a roadmap. If it’s complex, you’ll get feedback loops. If you get neither, you’ve revealed that “complexity” is a cover story for inaction.
For activists, this distinction is liberating. It stops us from chasing neat, one-shot fixes in places where progress can only come through steady experimentation. And it stops us from being gaslit into believing that hard-but-solvable problems are untouchable. It’s a way to cut through the illusion of complexity and move where others insist movement is impossible.
I write for free, once or twice a week, but the real joy is hearing from readers. You’re always welcome to respond. Hit ‘reply’ or send me a message below.
FYI: On the side I write a weekly newsletter called For People and Planet. It’s all about progress, hope, and the ways people are building a better future with Earth. You can take a look here: forpeopleandpla.net
Thank you for spelling this out so succinctly.
Articulate and insightful. Thank you!