From: jimruttshow8596
The application of Constructor Theory to social systems provides a novel approach to strategic planning and change management, moving beyond traditional outcome-focused methodologies. This approach, known as Esterline mapping, focuses on understanding and influencing the “dispositionality” of a system rather than attempting to control its exact future state [01:20:06].
What is Constructor Theory?
Constructor Theory, in physics, is described as an approach that focuses on enumerating what is impossible rather than outlining the rules of what is doable [01:17:14]. It challenges an atomistic interpretation of phenomena [01:17:28] and offers a perspective that is “essentially a duel” or the same physics looked at from a 180-degree different perspective [01:17:06].
In social systems, applying Constructor Theory is considered “a lot less controversial” than in physics [01:17:49].
Key Concepts in Application
The framework integrates several core concepts from complexity science and complexity thinking:
- Constraints [00:07:41]: In social systems, constraints can be mapped and changed [00:08:33]. The approach uses a “typology” of constraints rather than a rigid taxonomy [00:33:11].
- Constructors [01:21:52]: A Constructor is defined as something that produces a transformation when other things pass through it or make contact with it [01:21:58]. Notably, in human systems, a Constructor can change during the act of construction itself, rather than remaining rigid [01:22:11].
- Energy and Time Dimensions [01:24:59]: Constraints and Constructors are mapped onto a grid based on the “energy cost of change” and the “time to change” [01:18:32].
- Energy (E): A shorthand for resource and attention [01:26:01].
- Time (T): Reflects inherent temporal dependencies, such as the years it takes for London taxi drivers to gain the necessary knowledge [01:25:23] or the time required for a human hippocampus to change structure to accommodate knowledge [01:25:40].
Esterline Mapping
This practical method involves:
- Mapping Constraints: Identifying the constraints within a system [01:18:27].
- Placing on a Grid: Position constraints on a grid showing energy cost of change versus time to change [01:18:32]. If there’s disagreement on placement, the item is broken down into finer-grained components until agreement is reached [00:32:10].
- Counterfactual Line: Drawing a line in the top right of the grid, representing areas where the energy cost or time to change is too high, meaning it is unlikely to change [01:18:43]. This establishes what cannot change [01:22:59].
- Liminal Line: An additional line behind the counterfactual line indicates things that “we can’t change, but somebody else could” [01:19:00]. This has been useful in presenting to executives who may realize certain changes are not within their domain but are possible if another party acts [01:19:02].
- High Variability (Bottom Left): The bottom-left area of the grid represents vulnerabilities or high variability [01:19:14].
- Microactions: The approach then leads to generating numerous “microactions” (50 or 60) aimed at changing the “dispositionality” of the system [01:19:30]. This means making desired outcomes more probable and undesired ones less probable [01:19:37].
Benefits and Outcomes
- Reduced Conflict: The process can transform warring groups into a collaborative environment, leading to projects that wouldn’t have been conceived otherwise [01:19:45].
- Dispositional Management: Instead of setting fixed end goals, it focuses on managing the system’s disposition, allowing changes to be made and then observing the outcomes [01:20:49]. This aligns with the principle that in a complex system, you cannot control the output directly [00:08:35].
- Energy Reduction Metaphor: Similar to chemical catalysis, this approach aims to reduce the “activation energy” for desirable actions [01:23:27]. By making “the energy cost of virtue less than the energy cost of sin,” life can become easier [01:20:12].
- Fractal Representation: The system allows for aggregating data at different levels of competence, so a president can view a national narrative landscape and a school principal can view their local one, all from the same source data [01:12:47]. This ensures alignment without imposing top-down, averaged interventions [01:13:25].
Practical Application and Evolution
The development of Constructor Theory’s application in social systems has been rapid, achieving in six months what took the Cynefin framework ten years [01:18:19]. It is seen as a potential “complexity alternative to Porter’s five forces” for strategic planning [01:21:25]. The methodology is currently being refined, with language and representations evolving rapidly [01:21:01]. It also incorporates methods like “red-blue teaming” in military strategy to combine grand strategy and tactics within the same framework [01:26:41].
This framework leverages the idea of “lots and lots of small things happening in parallel” to afford more failure and lead to more learning, ultimately allowing for navigation of complexity [01:14:42].