Tool no. 96 - Some Equations for Synergy

Finding an equation to help clients to identify, measure, enhance and sustain synergies

See useful equations

Purposes

We need to be able to create viable tools (including software) for creating metadesign teams
One of these tools is the four orders of synergy
An ideal equation would act as a model for quantifying and integrating them
It would act as a working model by which to test our assumptions in a practical context (then modify & refine)
It would enable clients to apply subtle principles before they have completely grasped them

Methods

The first task might be to choose appropriate variables that can be measured
There should probably be no more that 3 or 4 of these (to reduce confusion / complexity)
Other useful equations may provide a template, or may inspire new ideas

In a whole system comprising n number of parts, there will be x possible relations among all of those parts
Hence, in the example of the tetrahedron there are 4 parts (i.e. nodes), therefore

Levels of synergy

Each level is dependent on synergy being present at the previous stage

First Level Synergy

A minimum of 2 players and 1 relation are needed for first level synergy to emerge

This would be require that each of these players is in a suitable state for combination
It would also require that

Second Level Synergies

A minimum of 4 players and 6 relations are needed for second level synergies to emerge

This would be require that each of these players is in a suitable state for combination
It is possible for up to 15 second order synergies to emerge within this system

Third Level Synergies

A minimum of 8 players and 28 relations are needed for third level synergies to emerge

This would be require that each of these players is in a suitable state for combination
It is possible for up to 368 second order synergies to emerge within this system

Fourth Level Synergies

A minimum of 16 players and 120 relation are needed for fourth level synergies to emerge

This would be require that each of these players is in a suitable state for combination
It is possible for up to ? second order synergies to emerge within this system

Towards an equation for Team Synergy

There are many issues regarding the best way to create effective metadesign teams
In a four-person team a a high level of synergy within the team is needed
This synergy must be reproducible elsewhere via tools we develop (we are not the product)
N.B. There is (always) a distinction between what we evolve and test as researchers and what we recommend in our methods
So far we are advocating 4 MetaCoordinators, managed by 3, 5 or 7 actual managers
Do we have agreement on this? (there seems to be unspoken disapproval)

The value of the "human co-ordinators" was in the rigorous exploration of each of the 'cognitive' styles arriving at a keen understanding of each.
We have now grown beyond that need, amply demonstrated by the difficulty in determining the nature of the next stages within the familiar template. Projecting these four seperate views onto

Four players are responsible for six relations...but...each player is (half) responsible for half of those six.
This means (for example) that one slightly disgruntled player can jeopardise the whole system very easily
Our solution is to look for, and map ways in which team synergy can be enhanced...then use it to guide actual examples
Team Synergy would be measured by testing the presence and intensity of each of the 6 structural couplings (among the four players)
(we may agree that) Structural Coupling exists when each player habitually values each other's support/services/aid
Hence there are 12 views within the team of 4...each can be tested by a test at each....then comparing the responses

Action

We need to team-design (led by Anette?) these 4 metacoordinators to personify and idealise the four cognitive roles

Once this is done it will become possible to measure the team's structural coupling in 6 places
(N.B. Importantly, this will avoid a sense of 'blame' or underachievement by real individuals)
Another factor is the positional value of each player - defined by accounting for all of the (4) perceived structural coupling usefulness readings

etc.