The field of system dynamics identifies several archetypes: common patterns that drive behavior in many situations. One of the most salient archetypes of our current period is called “success to the successful,” which fairly well describes twenty-first-century capitalism or the late stages of the board game Monopoly. It looks like this:
Seems to me there are two assumptions in this logic - both A and B need the same types of resources and both utilize them at the same efficiency. So if one is getting fewer resources, they are producing less output; which means they will get fewer resources, and the loop continues. This works if resources are controlled by those who expect a return, which is then tied to output.
Most importantly your article highlights how we can break out of this cycle by innovating and jumping to a new S curve.
While not exactly on point, system design often creates the distortions that predict outcomes. Many years ago I read a book by Malcolm Gladwell. It focused on a couple of youth sports activities, as I remember Little League baseball and hockey. Both of these sports had STRICT rules on age eligibility and dates when a kid turned 6 for example. It turns out, in both cases, that the very best and exclusive teams at age 18 will be LOADED with kids who were 5 years, 11 months in age since those children will SIMPLY be nearly 17% more mature than their peers. If I remember correctly the Olympic Gold Medal team for ice hockey had more than 70% of the players born in the most advantageous month. Perhaps parents interested in sports should plan their births accordingly :) Those kids get on the "better" team from the start and often stay together through youth. This is the danger of G&T programs as they are arbitrary in selection of aptitude at a given time. This has consequences and is best exemplified in nations with high--stakes aptitude testing.
Hi Stephanie - I love your casual loop diagrams.
Seems to me there are two assumptions in this logic - both A and B need the same types of resources and both utilize them at the same efficiency. So if one is getting fewer resources, they are producing less output; which means they will get fewer resources, and the loop continues. This works if resources are controlled by those who expect a return, which is then tied to output.
Most importantly your article highlights how we can break out of this cycle by innovating and jumping to a new S curve.
While not exactly on point, system design often creates the distortions that predict outcomes. Many years ago I read a book by Malcolm Gladwell. It focused on a couple of youth sports activities, as I remember Little League baseball and hockey. Both of these sports had STRICT rules on age eligibility and dates when a kid turned 6 for example. It turns out, in both cases, that the very best and exclusive teams at age 18 will be LOADED with kids who were 5 years, 11 months in age since those children will SIMPLY be nearly 17% more mature than their peers. If I remember correctly the Olympic Gold Medal team for ice hockey had more than 70% of the players born in the most advantageous month. Perhaps parents interested in sports should plan their births accordingly :) Those kids get on the "better" team from the start and often stay together through youth. This is the danger of G&T programs as they are arbitrary in selection of aptitude at a given time. This has consequences and is best exemplified in nations with high--stakes aptitude testing.
It looks like the signs on the Likelihood of Success of B and Success of B are + when they should be - on the diagram.