The Dance of Eternity (16)

Parallel relationships between organisms and genes, organizations and individuals, and individuals and ideas

When applying research on biological evolution and the insights gained from it to innovative organizational management, one can draw an analogy by replacing the relationship between an organism and its genes with that between an organization and its members. Another important analogy is the relationship between an individual and their ideas. Here, let us delve a little deeper into this latter perspective.

Just as organisms acquire genetic diversity and traits adapted to the environment survive through natural selection, an analogy can be made that organizational members also possess diversity, and those who can adapt survive. Furthermore, it is a structure where if an individual's ideas are diverse, the ideas best adapted to the environment among them will survive. The diagram shown in the previous post also illustrates this process of acquiring diversity and the selection of surviving options.

Humans are unique in that, unlike other species, they possess "imagination." Considering the dynamic equilibrium where individual ideas are constantly replaced through cycles of divergence and convergence, before jumping immediately to replacing organizational members, we can consider whether it is possible to establish a system where individuals constantly generate, test, and refine new ideas.

If we do not seek organizational diversity only in the diversity of members, but rather if each member can freely control diversity by manifesting or tucking away various ideas as needed, the organization as a whole may become more flexible to environmental changes. Thinking at the organization/member level using the metaphor of epigenetic suppression, we can understand that organizational members, who are inherently diverse, are suppressed by codes of conduct and organizational rules, and the potential diversity each possesses is expressed or suppressed according to environmental adaptation. It can be said that organizational members also essentially harbor diverse ideas, and by opening and closing them like "drawers" as needed, they can bring diversity in and out.

If you are pursuing the uniqueness of ideas, you should focus not on the "public face" that conforms to universal organizational values or dogmas, but on the "individual face"—the values and sensibilities formed through family environment, friendships, upbringing, and so on. It is precisely when ideas are rooted in this "individual face" that the potential diversity of organizational members is truly expressed, and as a result, it leads to the diversity of the organization as a whole.

Epigenetics is not a mechanism where "diversity is passively formed in response to environmental demands," but rather a mechanism that controls thediversity that already existsby loosening or tightening constraints on its expression. In the context of human resource management, this meansan HR system that hires and nurtures unique talent that may not be immediately useful. This kind of management is not easy in organizations where the competitive environment is fixed, necessary organizational capabilities are clear, or where people are accustomed to efficient daily operations, but that is precisely the function ofstabilizing selection.

The same is true for individuals. We can nurture our potential inner diversity by spending time on activities that are not immediately useful, pondering thoughts that are not directly linked to work, or intentionally building altruistic relationships that do not promise direct profit, yet we often neglect to do so. In his posthumous work "How Will You Measure Your Life?", Clayton Christensen, whom I introduced earlier, draws a parallel with the innovator's dilemma and warns against "neglecting human relationships that you think, 'I must cherish this, I must deepen this relationship now, I must make up (even though we fought in the past),' and then regretting it after it is too late."

Connecting the Dots

This is a digression, but I cannot help but recall the famous speech "Stay Hungry, Stay Foolish" that Steve Jobs gave at the Stanford University commencement in 2005. In it, he talked about "Connecting the Dots." He explained that past events and experiences only make sense when looking back, and he shared his experience of dropping out of college and auditing a calligraphy course, which later led to the beautiful typography of the Macintosh. He also talked about how being ousted from Apple, the company he founded, led to the establishment of NeXT and his involvement with Pixar, which later led to his return to Apple and its subsequent leap forward. His message was that "you cannot connect the dots looking forward; you can only connect them looking backward, and the sequence of dots that seemed unrelated at the time will have meaning."

Planned Happenstance

There is also the "Planned Happenstance Theory" proposed by J.D. Krumboltz of Stanford University and A.S. Levin of California State University. This is the idea ofintentionally creating many seemingly unrelated and random events and then utilizing them retroactively to weave new opportunities. For its practice, they recommendcultivating curiosity, continuous learning, a willingness to take risks, and the courage to accept failure. It is only with these elements that unexpected events can be transformed into meaningful opportunities.

While it may look like a haphazard approach at first glance, when overlaid with Jobs' speech, the perspective emerges thatif you don't have enough 'dots (experiences)' to begin with, you cannot draw a 'picture (future)'. If you who are reading this text are aware of a tendency to be overly meticulous in planning and to be fixated on those plans, there is great significance in encountering this theory.

To be honest, when I was working at a large corporation, there was a time when I wanted to make plans and follow a stereotypical career path like "marriage -> study abroad -> promotion." But after jumping into the startup world, it was a series of unexpected events and difficulties, and I was beaten down and cried for help many times, but looking back now, I am convinced that I would not be who I am today without those encounters and experiences.

Bricolage

Let us also touch upon "Bricolage" proposed by the French anthropologistClaude Lévi-Strauss". Bricolage refers tothe creative act of combining materials and tools at hand to create something new or solve problems. Although "collecting useless things at random" is not the goal itself, it implies thatin order to obtain a 'rich stock of materials' that will be useful later, it is also necessary to collect things whose purpose is not clear at first.

Accumulating experiences, skills, and ideas that do not seem useful immediately is not easy, but they are the very "materials" essential for creating the future.