Really compelling angle on Beer's centralization bias. The octopus comparision is spot-on for commons work - thier distributed cognition is exactly what you need when operational units can't just ping headquarters for every descision. I worked with a decentralized mutual aid network once and the coordination problem was brutal because we kept trying to build "brain" structures when we needed "arm" structures. Your point about ant colonies as environment-for-each-other is interesting too, though I wonder if that gets you close to eusocial dynamics which might be its own trap. Looking forward to seeing where you take this.
What I'm either misunderstanding or missing in this, my first read on the topic, is the relationship *between* the various autonomous, local systems — i.e. the individual arms of octopi, or else individual ants within a colony. For a local system to be responsive, it must be either self-directed, or else directed by way of a proximal directorate. Local systems can not respond when they're directed remotely. This is a lesson I wish many organizations would learn.
Might small, local systems be modular? Might small, local systems be small, local systems *because* they're modular? If so, then how may modular systems move in concert? What motivates them?
This is an interesting question. I think in simple terms, according to the VSM, you are talking about the function of 'system 2' which is responsible for the coordination between the various autonomous/'local' systems. Its responsibility is to ensure that the activity of each local system does not tread on the toes of another. It is a coordination function.
Yes I think they can be modular, certainly in the ants case, but they still need something there to coordinate the activity of the local systems, and that's called system 2 in VSM terms.
So, although within each "module" (i.e. each individual ant) there are layers of systems (systems 1-5), there must be another *order* of a "system 2" which coordinates the functions of each "ant" module within a colony, to achieve concerted function on a larger scale… an "operational" or maybe a "strategic" scale, to use alternate terms?
Yes, the model is recursive and operates at different scales simultaneously. Id recommend my previous article which introduces the vsm and starts out with the concept of recursion
I definitely read your VSM intro first. It's a deep topic, which I've encountered examples of in the past, such as Benjamin Bratton's "The Stack" — but I've never read it described as an independent theory.
Really compelling angle on Beer's centralization bias. The octopus comparision is spot-on for commons work - thier distributed cognition is exactly what you need when operational units can't just ping headquarters for every descision. I worked with a decentralized mutual aid network once and the coordination problem was brutal because we kept trying to build "brain" structures when we needed "arm" structures. Your point about ant colonies as environment-for-each-other is interesting too, though I wonder if that gets you close to eusocial dynamics which might be its own trap. Looking forward to seeing where you take this.
I'm glad you liked it! Thinking of parts of an organisation as 'arm structures' in that way seems like it could be useful...
What I'm either misunderstanding or missing in this, my first read on the topic, is the relationship *between* the various autonomous, local systems — i.e. the individual arms of octopi, or else individual ants within a colony. For a local system to be responsive, it must be either self-directed, or else directed by way of a proximal directorate. Local systems can not respond when they're directed remotely. This is a lesson I wish many organizations would learn.
Might small, local systems be modular? Might small, local systems be small, local systems *because* they're modular? If so, then how may modular systems move in concert? What motivates them?
???
This is an interesting question. I think in simple terms, according to the VSM, you are talking about the function of 'system 2' which is responsible for the coordination between the various autonomous/'local' systems. Its responsibility is to ensure that the activity of each local system does not tread on the toes of another. It is a coordination function.
Yes I think they can be modular, certainly in the ants case, but they still need something there to coordinate the activity of the local systems, and that's called system 2 in VSM terms.
So, although within each "module" (i.e. each individual ant) there are layers of systems (systems 1-5), there must be another *order* of a "system 2" which coordinates the functions of each "ant" module within a colony, to achieve concerted function on a larger scale… an "operational" or maybe a "strategic" scale, to use alternate terms?
Yes, the model is recursive and operates at different scales simultaneously. Id recommend my previous article which introduces the vsm and starts out with the concept of recursion
Glad you enjoyed the article!
I definitely read your VSM intro first. It's a deep topic, which I've encountered examples of in the past, such as Benjamin Bratton's "The Stack" — but I've never read it described as an independent theory.
Good stuff.
Yeah bratton is good I read that years ago I should read it again some time