AxelHeyst wrote: ↑Thu Apr 15, 2021 10:34 am
That implies that if I haven't yet L6-developed a sufficient number of nodes/activities in my life, no amount of WoG diagramming is going to get me to the position of operating a web that possesses tensegrity. It'll just be theoretical drawing exercises.
Observation is hugely effective in evolving a system. IMO, how you use the diagramming determines if it is only theoretical.
I think you'll be able to (need to!) exercise the new pattern at small scales, before applying it to large. A small trial demands few resources. It can happen right now. Think exploration of tensegrity with some sticks and string:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KzSPS3WCY2c&t=32s
The video shows the other side of heavy interdependence. Yes, within the bounds of tolerance, it is magical. But when it fails, it does so spectacularly. Well designed systems have mechanisms to handle excessive disruption. Think of a circuit breaker in your house, a freeze when the market rapidly crashes, or just a couple hundred bucks in your dresser. The risk mitigation comes at the price of ongoing overhead - friction.
There are appropriate times for crude, inefficient patterns. They can strengthen the system as a whole, even make it anti-fragile. There's a good chance your existing system is smarter than you appreciate. We are all passing a mutable resource (time) between nodes. Inefficiencies may have emerged for reasons you do not understand or cannot articulate. They can be an intelligent part of the whole, supporting needs you are blind to.
This is a reason continuous change with ongoing feedback is critical. Nobody has a perfect understanding of reality. Design is a discovery process - evolving a model of the living system, to better effect change within it.
I encourage anyone consuming a maturity model to see it as a necessarily generic abstraction. It can inform what you try, but cannot prescribe the answer.