From Merrelyn Emery
My interest was piqued by two recent New Scientist articles discussing the relationship between organisational structure and human behaviour.
In his article comparing banking institutions and colonies of bacteria, Harvey Rubin picks out similarities between the two (19 September, p 24). These are phenotypical – that is, observable – while the differences between them are genotypical. While bacteria “optimise growth for any external and internal conditions”, bankers have attempted to operate without any attention to their external environment.
The differences can be understood in terms of two design principles, first outlined by psychologist and organisational development pioneer Fred Emery in 1967. The organisational structure of banks has been built on the first design principle (DP1), called “redundancy of parts”, in which responsibility for coordination is located at least one level above any individual doing work. Conversely, bacteria are organised on the genotypical design principle called “redundancy of function”, DP2, in which adaptation depends on regulatory systems built into the operational parts of the system itself.
The unstable nature of DP1 systems means they require external regulation. As we have seen in the global banking system, the entire system fails if these regulators are removed or weakened.
Advertisement
In the same issue, Michael Bond suggests we can make people a little kinder to each other by evolving social networks that encourage altruism and cooperation (19 September, p 32). The group-based networks he discusses are built on redundancy of function, DP2.
While DP1 structures are inherently competitive, DP2 structures are inherently cooperative. It is not the individuals’ capacity for empathy and compassion that primarily determines their behaviour, it is the nature of the structures in which they are embedded.
Florey, ACT, Australia
