Disruption
This page describes the organizational forces that limit change.  It explains how to overcome them when necessary. 

Power& tradition holding back progress
This page uses an example to illustrate how:
  • A business can gain focus from targeting key customers,
  • Business planning activities performed by the whole organization can build awareness, empowerment and coherence. 
  • A program approach can ensure strategic alignment. 
Be responsive to market dynamics
This page uses the example of HP's printer organization freeing itself from its organizational constraints to sell a printer targeted at the IBM pc user. 
The constraints are described. 
The techniques to overcome them are implied. 
Overcome reactionaries
Primary Navigation

Disruptive transformations of complex adaptive systems

Summary
This page reviews Christensen's disruption of a complex adaptive system (
This page introduces the complex adaptive system (CAS) theory frame.  The theory is positioned relative to the natural sciences.  It catalogs the laws and strategies which underpin the operation of systems that are based on the interaction of emergent agents. 
John Holland's framework for representing complexity is outlined.  Links to other key aspects of CAS theory discussed at the site are presented. 
CAS
).  The mechanism is discussed with examples from biology and business. 
Introduction
This page introduces the complex adaptive system (CAS) theory frame.  The theory is positioned relative to the natural sciences.  It catalogs the laws and strategies which underpin the operation of systems that are based on the interaction of emergent agents. 
John Holland's framework for representing complexity is outlined.  Links to other key aspects of CAS theory discussed at the site are presented. 
Complex adaptive systems
(CAS) are
This page discusses the mechanisms and effects of emergence underpinning any complex adaptive system (CAS).  Key research is reviewed. 
emergent
Plans are interpreted and implemented by agents.  This page discusses the properties of agents in a complex adaptive system (CAS). 
It then presents examples of agents in different CAS.  The examples include a computer program where modeling and actions are performed by software agents.  These software agents are aggregates. 
The participation of agents in flows is introduced and some implications of this are outlined. 
Agents
and the pools of their supplies and products exist while the dynamics of the network flows sustain them.  A co-developing network will
This page reviews the inhibiting effect of the value delivery system on the expression of new phenotypic effects within an agent. 
mutually enforce synergies and constraints across the network
.  Agents separated from the network are however free to develop without the synergistic constraints into a different network.  If the two separated networks of agents become re-joined a
This page reviews the catalytic impact of infrastructure on the expression of phenotypic effects by an agent.  The infrastructure reduces the cost the agent must pay to perform the selected action.  The catalysis is enhanced by positive returns. 
catalytic amplifier
may change the rates of flow through the network and some pools and agents that structurally depend on the old rates or resource levels may be disrupted. 

In business the phenomenon was described by Clayton Christensen as "The Innovator's Dilemma". 

He identifies conditions for the creation of a second agent network and later reconnection of the two sets of agents:
  1. They must replicate successfully
  2. They must scale
  3. They are different
  4. There is a
    Barriers are particular types of constraints on flows.  They can enforce separation of a network of agents allowing evolution to build diversity.  Examples of different types of barriers and their effects are described. 
    barrier
    that separates the two networks for a time
  5. Their cross network synergies differ in mutually incompatible ways
The natural obstacles to mixing include a profit constraint and a performance difference.  The destabilization and subsequent hollowing out of constrained businesses that were not cost competitive with a newly joined viable product pool is called disruption. 

By profit constraint we mean a control decision to select flows which maximize profit.  In general CAS
The agents in complex adaptive systems (CAS) must model their environment to respond effectively to it.  Samuel modeling is described as an approach. 
models
this equates to current high priority energy capturing
Flows of different kinds are essential to the operation of complex adaptive systems (CAS). 
Example flows are outlined.  Constraints on flows support the emergence of the systems.  Examples of constraints are discussed. 
flows
being encouraged by regulatory agents.  In systems which have evolved, coping mechanisms exist to limit such decision making.  Suppressors can be activated to place a brake on the control decisions which value current flows and select for the already high priority flows.  In cellular systems failure of suppressors can results in out of control tumor behavior. 

The difference in extended alignment between the two networks is reflected in business as a difference between the requirements of one networks major customer's job to be done and those of the other.  Both networks respond to the requirements with the most competitive products or solutions their agents can develop and remain viable.  When there is a significant difference between the two sets of requirements, and the more feature rich set are more costly to deliver, and the customer segments start to overlap then the low cost solution network agents will disrupt the other network's agents unless the high cost network agents can change their business model. 

Disruption can be seen as a parasitic is a long term relationship between the parasite and its host where the resources of the host are utilized by the parasite without reciprocity.  Often parasites include schematic adaptations allowing the parasite to use the hosts modeling and control systems to divert resources to them. 
activity.  CAS host agents typically defend themselves by suppressors such as immune has to support and protect an inventory of host cell types, detect and respond to invaders and maintain the symbiont equilibrium within the microbiome.  It detects microbes which have breached the secreted mucus barrier, driving them back and fortifying the barrier.  It culls species within the microbiome that are expanding beyond requirements.  It destroys invaders who make it into the internal transport networks.  As part of its initialization it has immune cells which suppress the main system to allow the microbiome to bootstrap.  The initial microbiome is tailored by the antibodies supplied from the mother's milk while breastfeeding.  The immune system consists of two main parts the older non-adaptive part and the newer adaptive part.  The adaptive part achieves this property by being schematically specified by DNA which is highly variable.  By rapid reproduction the system recombines the DNA variable regions in vast numbers of offspring cells which once they have been shown not to attack the host cell lines are used as templates for interacting with any foreign body (antigen).  When the immune cell's DNA hyper-variable regions are expressed as y-shaped antibody proteins they typically include some receptor like structures which match the surfaces of the typical antigen.  Once the antibody becomes bound to the antigen the immune system cells can destroy the invader. 
sub-systems, leveraging sexual reproduction enforces the mixing of current germ-line DNA of a male and a female organism, with a recombination process, to ensure the generation of new schematic recipes and phenotypes in their shared offspring.  , where
Plans change in complex adaptive systems (CAS) due to the action of genetic operations such as mutation, splitting and recombination.  The nature of the operations is described. 
schematic mixing
maximizes the chance that
To benefit from shifts in the environment agents must be flexible.  Being sensitive to environmental signals agents who adjust strategic priorities can constrain their competitors. 
some offspring will be resistant
.  Parasites are forced to respond likewise and an
This page reviews the strategy of setting up an arms race.  At its core this strategy depends on being able to alter, or take advantage of an alteration in, the genome or equivalent.  The situation is illustrated with examples from biology, high tech and politics. 
arms race develops
.   The arms race requires, and hence maintains, the diversity of the
Plans emerge in complex adaptive systems (CAS) to provide the instructions that agents use to perform actions.  The component architecture and structure of the plans is reviewed. 
schemata
.  Parasitic competitive strategies can target any host structure including the host's ability to replicate its schemata.  Strategies have been found which use a protective sub-schema in the parasite along with a self-destruction sub-schema, expressed in agents that do not possess the protective sub-schema.  Crossing over, reconnects two DNA double helix chains A (1, 2) and B (1, 2) so that part of chain A1 and B1 become swapped.  Some part of B1 is now part of the A helix while some part of A1 is now part of the B helix.  's overhead can be justified by its ability to limit such strategies by potentially separating the impacting sub-schema from its self-protecting sub-schema turning the tables on the parasite. 

In business IBM's initial market share based strategy can be seen to have the effect of maximizing recombination and maintenance of resources and flows across its total eco-network.  The suppressor activity is complex requiring agents within IBM's regulatory infrastructure with connections to all the relevant businesses and the counter-intuitive power to constrain successful flows.  This strategy was particularly effective against parasitic strategies.  However, at the CAS level of the nation states, in whose economies businesses operate, administrators were interested in encouraging the diversity stimulated by the arms race so emergent
This page discusses the physical foundations of complex adaptive systems (CAS).  A small set of rules is obeyed.  New [epi]phenomena then emerge.  Examples are discussed. 
monopoly system rules
limit the market share strategy. 



























































































  Market Centric Workshops
The Physics - Politics, Economics & Evolutionary Psychology
Politics, Economics & Evolutionary Psychology

Business Physics
Nature and nurture drive the business eco-system
Human nature
Emerging structure and dynamic forces of adaptation


integrating quality appropriate for each market
 
This page looks at schematic structures and their uses.  It discusses a number of examples:
  • Schematic ideas are recombined in creativity. 
  • Similarly designers take ideas and rules about materials and components and combine them. 
  • Schematic Recipes help to standardize operations. 
  • Modular components are combined into strategies for use in business plans and business models. 

As a working example it presents part of the contents and schematic details from the Adaptive Web Framework (AWF)'s operational plan. 

Finally it includes a section presenting our formal representation of schematic goals. 
Each goal has a series of associated complex adaptive system (CAS) strategy strings. 
These goals plus strings are detailed for various chess and business examples. 
Strategy
| Design |
This page uses an example to illustrate how:
  • A business can gain focus from targeting key customers,
  • Business planning activities performed by the whole organization can build awareness, empowerment and coherence. 
  • A program approach can ensure strategic alignment. 
Program Management
| Home

Profiles | Papers | Glossary | E-mail us