How does the world change? Through networks and emergence.

The following is from a remarkable essay by Margaret Wheatley and Deborah Frieze, which I consider a must read. It is entitled: Using Emergence to Take Social Innovation to Scale

The starting quote is right of the mark:

Despite current ads and slogans, the world doesn’t change one person at a time. It changes when networks of relationships form among people who share a common cause and vision of what;s possible. This is good news for those of us intent on creating a positive future. Rather than worry about critical mass, our work is to foster critical connections. We don’t need to convince large numbers of people to change; instead, we need to connect with kindred spirits. Through these relationships, we will develop the new knowledge, practices, courage and
commitment that lead to broad-based change.

But networks aren’t the whole story. As networks grow and transform into active, collaborative communities, we discover how Life truly changes, which is through emergence. When separate, local efforts connect with each other as networks, then strengthen as communities of practice, suddenly and surprisingly a new system emerges at a greater level of scale. This system of influence possesses qualities and capacities that were unknown in the individuals. It isn’t
that they were hidden; they simply don’t exist until the system emerges. They are properties of the system, not the individual, but once there, individuals possess them. And the system that emerges always possesses greater power and influence than is possible through planned, incremental change. Emergence is how Life creates radical change and takes things to scale.

The essay then tries to address the following questions:

Why do networks form? What are the conditions that support their creation?

What keeps a network alive and growing? What keeps members connected?

What type of leadership is required? Why do people become leaders?

What type of leadership interferes with or destroys the network?

What happens after a healthy network forms? What’s next?

If we understand these dynamics and the lifecycle of emergence, what can we do as leaders, activists and social entrepreneurs to intentionally foster emergence?

And this is what they have to say about Emergence, before tackling in detail what they call the life-cycle of emergence:

Emergence violates so many of our Western assumptions of how change happens that it often takes quite a while to understand it. In nature, change never happens as a result of top-down, pre-conceived strategic plans, or from the mandate of any single individual or boss. Change begins as local actions spring up simultaneously in many different areas. If these changes remain disconnected, nothing happens beyond each locale. However, when they become connected, local actions can emerge as a powerful system with influence at a more global or comprehensive level. (Global here means a larger scale, not necessarily the entire planet.)

These powerful emergent phenomena appear suddenly and surprisingly. Think about how the Berlin Wall suddenly came down, how the Soviet Union ended, how corporate power quickly came to dominate globally. In each case, there were many local actions and decisions, most of which were invisible and unknown to each other, and none of which was powerful enough by itself to create change. But when these local changes coalesced, new power emerged.

What could not be accomplished by diplomacy, politics, protests, or strategy suddenly happened. And when each materialized, most were surprised.

Emergent phenomena always have these characteristics: They exert much more power than the sum of their parts; they always possess new capacities different than the local actions that engendered them; they always surprise us by theirappearance.

It is important to note that emergence always results in a powerful system that has many more capacities than could ever be predicted by analyzing the individual parts. We see this in the behavior of hive insects such as bees and termites. Individual ants possess none of the intelligence or skills that are in the hive. No matter how intently scientists study the behavior of individual ants, they can never see the behavior of the hive. Yet once the hive forms, each ant acts with the intelligence and skillfulness of the whole. And over time, even though the individual ants die off, the hive develops greater intelligence.

This aspect of emergence has profound implications for social entrepreneurs. Instead of developing them individually as leaders and skillful practitioners, we would do better to connect them to like-minded others and create the conditions for emergence. The skills and capacities needed by them will be found in the system that emerges, not in better training programs.

Because emergence only happens through connections, Berkana has developed a four stage model that catalyzes connections as the means to achieve global level change. Our philosophy is to Act locally, connect regionally, learn globally. We focus on discovering pioneering efforts and naming them as such. We then connect these efforts to other similar work globally. We nourish this network in many ways, but most essentially through creating opportunities for
learning and sharing of experiences and shifting into communities of practice.

We also illuminate the work of these pioneering efforts so that many more people will learn from them. We are attempting to work intentionally with emergence so that small, local efforts can become a global force for change.”

3 Comments How does the world change? Through networks and emergence.

  1. AvatarTom Armstrong

    Is this a system to manifest change, used positively, but that can be used negatively, e.g., the Nazis in the 30s, the Soviet Union forming, the Berlin wall going up?

    The message I got from reading Berreby’s book, Us and Them, is that the cause of prejudice and discord is not differences in people, it is the banding that people do themselves in creating groups and subgroups. Grouping, itself, creates friction; it is not friction that causes us to band together in groups.

    It seems to me this essay is at odds with ‘kind’ scientists’ thinking these days.

    Please show me where I’m wrong.

  2. AvatarMichel Bauwens

    As far as I can see this process of emergence can be applied to all kinds of networks; including those with negative intent or effects; so I think your comment is correct.

  3. AvatarAdam

    I think emergence is just one side to the equation, the other is structure. The Berlin wall fell not only because there were emerging networks of people who wanted something different, but also because there was an opening in what social movement scholars call ‘the political opportunity structure’ due to the gradual decay of the old system. The French revolution is a case in point. There had been emerging networks of dissent in Paris for more than a century, but only when the parliament was convened and subsequently collapsed could there be a ‘revolution’. Its important not to forget this side of things. People can network as much as we want, but as long as the structure of the ruling system is intact, that networking will have very few effects.

Leave A Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.