Just a short note regarding birds, emergence and self-organization. There
is a tendency on this list to extoll the virtues of self-organization and
emergence. Just a reminder, that 'this too, shall pass.' To temper the
enthusiasm and bring some perspective I'd like to offer the following:
1. Emergent behavior is not new. The emphasis in other fields is new,
but physicists will be the first to admit that properties such as
'fluidity' and 'elasticity' do not belong to individual atoms or
molecules. They are 'emergent' properties of group interaction. Philip
Anderson has written a number of cautionary articles on the use and abuse
of the terms 'emergence' and 'self-organization.'
2. The tragedy of the commons is an emergent phenomena. Everyone looks
out for their own interests and the system collapses. The lesson is that
self-organization and emergence do not always produce desired outcomes.
Another interesting example is provided by Thomas Schelling's analysis of
segregation in Micromotives and Macrobehavior.
3. Although we can describe flock and other emergent phenomena with
'rules,' birds do not use them. A lot of flock behavior, such as flying
in flocks, occurs because it is aerodynamically more efficient and less
tiring for the birds. Simulation with rules may provide insight, but one
must be clear how and why the rules are relevant for 'real' behavior.
Along, the same lines, we must be crystal clear how the jargon translates
into real behavioral change in organizations. Learning to 'talk the talk'
is not enough.
4. Some individuals and organizations are more comfortable and more
efficient with hierarchical organizations that are more centrally
controlled. Self-organization will never be the ultimate panacea.
5. Self-organization can only take root in a culture that is highly
'error' tolerant. Creativity requires the freedom to fail. Otherwise
individuals will keep doing what they have always done. It may not be
efficient, it may not be effective, but doing what has always been done is
'safe.' It affords security. As a result, given the choice, most people
will choose security. Nature changes slowly.....I think nature would
approve. Unfortunately, I think that we, as a culture, are a long way
from being 'error' tolerant....particularly when error is so closely
linked to the 'bottom line.'
6. Creativity must be balanced with stability. If new skills or ideas
are not integrated and repeated, change will be fleeting and ephemeral.
Repetition is more mechanistic, but it, too, is important.
> and I couldn't resist the opportunity to offer the following, which
> elaborates the nature of flocking and its possible application to human
> organisation:
[Big snip by your host...]
--"Lynne Oetjen-Gerdes" <lynneog@earthlink.net>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>