Some human systems are characterized by very deep hierarchies; this is especially true of social systems that have been "designed", like corporations, militaries, etc. It is a natural tendency for packs of animals to pick leaders, the final purpose being to make the pack (or "team") function by removing lag and contention in decision making[1]. A human hierarchy is the iterative application of this principle. By contrast social systems that have not been designed are networks.
In terms of graphs a hierarchy (or tree) is described as a connected, unidirectional graph. The nodes at the bottom of the hierarchy are called leaves.
This tendency toward hierarchies is also displayed in the way we think about reality, for example a hierarchy (or tree) of cell fates is postulated for stem cells, evolutionary tree diagrams; even though in both cases a completely real picture would involve a more complex graph than a hierarchy (for example cell fate is considerably more plastic than originally believed and is even difficult to define; viruses and parasites can cut across kingdoms of lower order animals etc.)
But thinking in terms of hierarchies is easy, so it persists.
In the case of designed social systems, a principle, or multiple principles, must govern the construction of the hierarchy. Design principles of hierarchies include breakdown by function, responsibility, authority, etc. In addition, all human systems are animated by a history, and the rationale of the original design tends toward obscurity as time passes.
Most designed human systems are constructed to fulfill a responsibility: make a profit, fight a war, build a great project, defend the members, negotiate an outcome etc.
In a hierarchy designed to fulfill an ultimate responsibility, in which each node is organized by responsibilities and freedoms (i.e. a certain department, team, or group must accomplish X, while it has the authority from a higher hierarchical level to use A and do B and C) the ability of each node to function tends to be more difficult to the extent that the hierarchy is rigid, large and complex.
NOTE TO AUTHOR: Insert link to Ruling over Tens and Hundreds Part II
No comments:
Post a Comment