Kaospilot Gave a Language to Something That Was Already There

In the mid-1990s, I trained as a Kaospilot. The education did not create my way of thinking, but it gave language and structure to something I was already doing naturally: working when the solution does not yet exist, understanding complex situations and creating order out of uncertainty.

I have never been especially interested in tasks where someone has already written the entire manual. I become much more engaged when the assignment is: Here is the problem. Here are the conditions. Here are the limitations. Solve it.

It can be a film production, a concert, a building, an event, a business idea or an app. The mechanism is the same. First I observe reality. Then I try to understand the system: what is there, what is missing, what cannot be done, and what could be used in a completely different way from what was originally intended? Then I begin to create an image of something that does not yet exist.

Give Me the Problem

A good example is an assignment at the Gothenburg Concert Hall. For a film production, the entire front of the building had to be blacked out. The construction could only use attachment points on the building itself. No standard solution. No ready-made drawing.

I sat in front of the Concert Hall and sketched for three days.

To someone passing by, it may have looked as if I was simply sitting there drawing. But that was where the solution was created. I studied the facade, the proportions, the attachment points and the limitations. I tested ideas, rejected them and redrew them until the building itself became part of the solution.

That says a lot about how I work.

I do not need to be given the solution. I need to be given the problem.

Seeing What a Place Has Not Yet Become

Another example was a tender for an exclusive event in Puerto Banús. I flew down for the day for a site visit, studied the location, did my homework and flew home again.

There was a gigantic swimming pool. Instead of seeing it as something the event had to work around, I began to see the pool as part of the production itself. The vision became stages positioned in the water, where the pool, architecture, lighting and scenography became one experience.

It had not been done there in that way before.

We won the assignment.

That is the part of entrepreneurship that has always interested me most. Not the title entrepreneur, and not the administration surrounding a company, but the ability to recognise value before it becomes obvious.

What exists here that nobody else has seen yet?

The Vision Must Come Before the Plan

Many projects begin with budgets, spreadsheets, organisation charts, timelines and meetings. For me, something else has to come first:

What are we actually trying to create?

How should it feel? What should the audience, customer, guest or user understand immediately? What does the final picture look like?

If the target image is unclear, there is a risk that the organisation starts administering something that has not even been properly defined.

I prefer to begin with the future.

I make it visible.

Then I work backwards.

The Same Image – Completely Different Understanding

Show an advanced festival stage to two people. The first might say:

“Nice stage.”

The second immediately begins thinking about rigging, power, wind loads, LED, PA, transport, stage construction, crew, safety, backstage, audience flow, rehearsals and timelines.

They are looking at exactly the same image.

But they are not seeing the same thing.

One sees the result.

The other sees the road required to get there.

That is experience in concentrated form.

If the audience is entering at 4 PM on Thursday, everything must be finished and tested before then. For the systems to be tested, the technical installation must already be complete. For the technology to be installed, the structure must be finished. For the structure to be built, materials, people and transport must already be in place. And long before that, orders, agreements, drawings and decisions must have been completed.

The experienced person makes much of that calculation almost automatically.

The inexperienced person still sees only the image.

Communication Is Often the Weakest Point

After many years of projects, I am increasingly convinced that one of the greatest risks is not technology, economics or even the idea itself.

It is communication.

Words mean different things to different people.

Say “stage” to five people and they may see five completely different things. Say “simple app.” The client may see three buttons on a screen. The developer sees user accounts, a database, APIs, security, payments, testing and administration.

The same words.

Different realities.

That is why a meeting where everyone nods can be more dangerous than a meeting where people challenge the idea. Everyone may have heard the same presentation and still leave the room with completely different images of the project.

I recently ended my role in a project where, looking back, I can see exactly this. We talked. We had meetings. People nodded. I interpreted that as shared understanding.

In hindsight, I can see that everyone probably did not understand the same thing.

That is an important lesson.

Someone saying “I understand” does not mean they have understood the same thing you meant.

So it is no longer enough for me to ask:

“Is everyone on board?”

The better question is:

“Describe how you see the project.”

Or:

“What do you see when you look at this image?”

That is when the differences become visible before they become problems.

Communication Is Part of the Construction

I therefore do not see communication as something beside the project.

Communication is part of the construction itself.

If the people in a team do not share the same target image, they are in practice not working on the same project, even if the project name is identical in all their documents.

Good communication takes time. You have to visualise, explain, ask people to explain things back, show examples, describe consequences and clarify responsibilities.

An experienced person may look at an image and immediately understand that it represents six months of work. An inexperienced person may only see the final result.

That does not mean the person is wrong.

It means the vision has to be translated.

The less experience there is in the team, the more the vision must be translated into consequences.

What does the image actually mean? What has to be done? When must it happen? Who does it? What happens if it does not happen?

That is preparation, and it is far cheaper than discovering misunderstandings once production has already begun.

What you save on communication at the beginning, you often pay back during execution – with interest.

The Image Is the Beginning, Not the End

I have always thought visually. That is why the image is one of my most important tools.

A good visualisation can explain in seconds what might otherwise require several pages of text.

But the image is not the project plan.

The image is the beginning.

It says:

This is where we are going.

Then the next stage begins. What does it take to get there? Which people are needed? Which competencies? Which dependencies exist? Which risks? Which decisions? How much time? How much money? When must the work begin?

The vision is dismantled until it becomes buildable.

Now I Create the Understanding and Structure

This is where my way of working has changed. In the past, I often created the idea and then went deep into the production myself. I stood in the middle of the execution, solved the problems and made sure the result became real.

Today, I do not always need to do that.

Now I create the understanding and structure that make ideas possible to turn into reality.

That means I still begin with the opportunity and the vision, but then I develop it into something that others can take over and execute. The vision has to become understandable. Understanding has to become structure. Structure has to become responsibility. Responsibility has to become action.

AI Changes the Possibility of Transferring Experience

This is where AI has become an extremely powerful tool for me. AI does not replace my experience. It cannot replace decades of productions, problem-solving, people, technology, mistakes and real-world consequences.

But AI helps me do something that previously took much longer:

move what I see in my head out of my head.

A thought can become a visualisation. The visualisation can become a concept. The concept can develop into a business model, project structure, responsibility matrix, risk analysis, timeline, budget principles, checklists and an execution manual.

I can therefore move from:

“I can see something.”

to:

“Now you can see it too.”

and then to:

“Now you understand what it takes to make it happen.”

That changes my role.

I do not have to be the person who physically builds every part. I can create the vision, define the system and hand over a structure that others can work from.

AI Does Not Replace Understanding

There is also a risk. A hundred-page AI-generated manual does not mean a team has understood the project. Information is not the same as understanding.

AI therefore has to be used to reduce room for interpretation, not simply to increase the amount of text.

Visualisations, clear definitions, responsibilities, process maps, examples, decision points, consequences and checklists can make an enormous difference. But the most important question remains:

What does all of this mean for you?

A technician does not need the same information as a sponsor. An investor does not need the same information as the person building the structure. A marketer needs a different perspective from the project manager.

Everyone needs to understand the whole.

But above all, each person needs to understand their role within it.

I Start with the Future and Work Backwards

My method today can actually be described quite simply.

I see the opportunity.

I make it visible.

I ask what it requires.

Then I work backwards.

Result → execution → installation → preparation → procurement → decisions → design → financing → start.

Then I verify understanding.

Does everyone see the same goal? Does each person understand their role? Do they understand when their work has to begin? Do they understand which other parts depend on them?

Only then have we moved from inspiration to a project.

The Kaospilot, the Project Manager, the Scenographer, the Entrepreneur and AI

When I look back at my professional life, the connection becomes clear.

The Kaospilot taught me to work when the answers do not yet exist.

The project manager taught me that ideas have to work in reality.

The scenographer taught me to see and visualise something before it exists.

The entrepreneur taught me to discover opportunities and value where others see nothing.

AI now allows me to structure, visualise, document and transfer all of this to others much faster than before.

These are not five different roles.

They are five parts of the same process.

I see something that does not yet exist. I make it visible. Then I work backwards until we know how to get there.

And today, my work does not stop there.

Now I create the understanding and structure that make ideas possible to turn into reality.

Three Examples – Three Worlds, the Same Method