Conway's Law upgraded

The law in question is:

"Organizations which design systems are constrained to produce designs which are copies of the communication structures of these organizations."

The rule was first articulated in Melvyn Conway's "How Do Committees Invent" from 1968: https://www.melconway.com/Home/Committees_Paper.html.

It is a specialism of Albert Einstein's:

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking that created them."

And similar to Anais Nin's:

"We do not see the world as it is, but as we are."

Frederic Laloux in "Reinventing Organisations," posits colours representing states of organisational evolution from Red through to Teal. Each colour has a different ethos and methodology which constrains how it interacts and grows.

https://reinvorgmap.com/

I posit that Conway's rule when combined with Laloux's colour theory of organisational evolution can be restated thus:

"Networks which replicate and interact are constrained in their replication and interaction by their collective and individual internal structure, developmental state and stability according to the rules pertaining to the Laloux colours of network evolution."

This generalisation applies to any network be it natural, epistemological, physical, mathematical, psychological, philosophical and theological. A generalised theory of network evolution following on from Darwin. Stating it in these terms yields the more succinct and deliberately recursive:

Networks interact and evolve with and within a carrier network

and

Networks are built on and build abstractions that may not reflect physical topology

All networks of memes, bound together (via cultural framing etc.)All interacting forever in one massive Conway machine: a replicating multiplexed network fractal of infinite complexity.

Here is another article which chimes with my own:

https://aeon.co/essays/how-our-brain-sculpts-experience-in-line-with-our-expectations?fbclid=IwAR0dGG3qg-tR_25xPZdGuGblweE6yyvC4nd3MXHTCiAyXiB--6H245Qxo1E

... and to riff on this some more, this diagram explains also the solution to all the Flat Earth controversy and Riemann hypothesis etc. e.g. The networks are simultaneously divided and hyperconnected and form a series of abstraction layers much like a protocol stack. Moreover measurement and discernment of purpose of networks is a complex problem due to the following complications:

1. Laloux network evolutionary colours that operate in any network regardless of type and the dispositions of that network. E.g. a red network leader node will view network top down whereas lower down nodes are navigating using a more flat structure
2. Topological distance, number of hops and latency and signal to noise ratio all apply - to cortex interactions, between organisations, socially
3. Conway's law and my expansion applies
4. Abstraction layers sitting above the physical layers of the network
5. Networking techniques such as compression, encryption, malware, cloaking, handshaking and tunnelling evolve and occur in all network types and classes

My maths skills are a bit rusty and way below those needed so I will leave the detail of all this to others more qualified than myself. My guess is that Patten-Conway network field mathematics and hyper-dimensional network theory are new disciplines and will need time to bed in.

This also relates to my earlier theory of the Realm model as a way of understanding the principles of network interaction.

Studying Mel's diagram again we can clearly see a three-dimensional structure emerging in a vertical abstract plane and a rather flat looking interactivity in two dimensions. Edwin Abbott, anyone?

Note: communications between networks is based on multiplexed signals arranged in a stack rather like the OSI model. This allows networks to communicate between networks running the same protocol in other networks. This allows abstraction layers to form that transcend the apparent network topology.

Note: epistemology is dynamic (e.g. brought to life by a researcher in their own mind) even though the inputs and outputs (articles) could be considered static (e.g. like programs being loaded into an operating system).

Note: see this article for less abstract details on how this law inhibits organisations ability to adapt: https://hbr.org/1977/09/double-loop-learning-in-organizations

Note: this article from Warren Kinston develops this theme as it relates to an exploitable vulnerability with corrupt power: https://www.thee-online.com/blog/post/Corrupt-Power-Uses-Deception-Could-this-be-its-Weakness.aspx?