Thanks for doing this.
Please choose whichever question (if any) appeals to you most. Of course I'd be delighted if you could give an opinion or statement to all of them.
Where do you see similarities between your theory of antifragility and theories of Complexity Science?
Are characteristics of Complex Adaptive Systems like self-organisations, dissipative structure, self-similarity, non-linearity, etc. elements that contribute to the antifragility of a system?
Where to better learn about survival and antifragility than from nature itself. You describe the Lindy Effect for non-perishable things. Would you say that this allows the conclusion that organisations should look at the structure, topology and behavior of let's say Yeast bacteria that have survived millions of years under volatility, to learn how to better structure and organise themselves in the complex environment they operate in?
Based on Ashby's law of requisite variety, only complexity can match complexity. On the other hand, decision making under opaqueness and time pressure is often most effective when following very simple guidelines. How do you consolidate these two statements?
No skin in the game is a main driver for creating fragile systems. And yet, typical 'no skin in the games' consultancies continue to be highly successful and sought after in real life. How do you see this changing in the near future and can you describe how you could imagine e.g. a business model for a management consultancy that would follow your suggested approach?
Complex systems and environments display non-linear and, hence, unpredictable behavior. An antifragile system that can survive and evolve in such an environment needs to display redundant structures, optionality/adequate variety of response options, creativity, and needs to be able to learn. This is very much the opposite of a streamlined, efficient system. Do you have a suggestion for an approach how to find the right balance for a system between efficiency and antifragility?
Jussulent_Argonaut12 karma
NNT, Sir,
Thanks for doing this. Please choose whichever question (if any) appeals to you most. Of course I'd be delighted if you could give an opinion or statement to all of them.
Where do you see similarities between your theory of antifragility and theories of Complexity Science?
Are characteristics of Complex Adaptive Systems like self-organisations, dissipative structure, self-similarity, non-linearity, etc. elements that contribute to the antifragility of a system?
Where to better learn about survival and antifragility than from nature itself. You describe the Lindy Effect for non-perishable things. Would you say that this allows the conclusion that organisations should look at the structure, topology and behavior of let's say Yeast bacteria that have survived millions of years under volatility, to learn how to better structure and organise themselves in the complex environment they operate in?
Based on Ashby's law of requisite variety, only complexity can match complexity. On the other hand, decision making under opaqueness and time pressure is often most effective when following very simple guidelines. How do you consolidate these two statements?
No skin in the game is a main driver for creating fragile systems. And yet, typical 'no skin in the games' consultancies continue to be highly successful and sought after in real life. How do you see this changing in the near future and can you describe how you could imagine e.g. a business model for a management consultancy that would follow your suggested approach?
Complex systems and environments display non-linear and, hence, unpredictable behavior. An antifragile system that can survive and evolve in such an environment needs to display redundant structures, optionality/adequate variety of response options, creativity, and needs to be able to learn. This is very much the opposite of a streamlined, efficient system. Do you have a suggestion for an approach how to find the right balance for a system between efficiency and antifragility?
What's in this dude's safe?
Thank you again for your time and good luck!
View HistoryShare Link