Too Well Adapted to Survive?

By Afif Say
It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best
manage change.
Charles Darwin

The odd balls that dont seem like a good fit may save your team or company from extinction
someday.
Survival of the fittest, I really dislike this often misunderstood or misused quote, especially in social
Darwinism context. First it was coined by Herbert Spencer, and later used by Darwin as a synonym for
natural selection. Without getting into the much discussed meaning of fittest here, I believe it is a poor
attempt to explain individuals, who have better adapted to current environment thus have better chances
of reproducing.
Let me explain two points. First of all, it doesnt claim that only those individuals who best adapt will
survive, it is reproduction that counts. Second, individuals who adapt better to current environment
have better chances - as long as current environment stays the same.
Given my medical background and business experience, mere observation says that social and biological
systems which share common behavioral and evolutionary patterns are not exceptions. Thus I believe we
can approach patterns of social structures - like communities, companies, or teams - in this way: they are
complex adaptive systems.
Having individuals better adapted to the current environment increases the chances of the survival of a
species. Yet there is another component necessary to increase probability of long term survival: adaptive
capacity. Adaptive capacity is the ability of the species to adapt the changing environment as opposed
to adapting the current environment, as in the survival of fittest case. And, in evolutionary terms,
adaptive capacity requires having enough variety in the genetic pool. Example -if a sudden dramatic
change occurs in the environment, the genetic pool may come up with individuals who can withstand or
adapt to these new conditions, thus guaranteeing the survival of the species. We see that in many plant
species which can withstand a wide range of climactic changes. For a more recent example I can point at
the century old publishing companies that could not adapt to the transformation to digital media and
internet distribution as they their bread taken away by new comers in less than two decades.
Thriving species which adapted perfectly to the current environment may have lesser chances of thriving
or even survival in the case of a sudden change in the environment. Why? Because they dont have
enough adaptive capacity in their genetic pool (remember they are perfectly adapted). Other species
which have good enough adaptation may have a better chance if they have more variety. Perfect or
too well adaptation may be a detriment if and when the conditions change in a relatively short time.
Companies and teams have similar patterns as they are social structures. Teams that may be thriving
under certain environmental conditions may fail if these conditions change abruptly (for example in a
global crisis). I remember many leadership trainings I attended which involved responding to sudden and
unannounced changes in the rules. Only teams or companies that have enough adaptive capacity can
successfully weather these changes.
Adaptive capacity for a social structure is provided by a diverse pool of members. By diversity here I
mean in all aspects, skills, profiles (such as thinkers, action oriented people), backgrounds, you name it.
The hiring practices I have observed I would like to make a distinction between hiring policies and
hiring practices here, as the first one is the intent the later one is the actual pattern mostly involved
interviews by peers or similar, produced tendencies to hire candidates that fit: fit the descriptions (i.e.
current problems/conditions) and fit the team (low genetic variance). The new hire may start producing
results quickly (as resources are limited) but it lowers the adaptive capacity thus the teams ability to
adapt changing conditions.
That might be the reason why those companies I observed did frequent reorganizations to overcome this
issue, consciously or not. However this remedy has its own unfavorable effects, like using chemotherapy
on a cancer patient.
Apart from hiring, performance management practices (again emphasis on practices not policies) further
favor fittest members, thus promotion paths, and leadership benches filling with look-alikes.
Increasing the adaptive capacity of your team, company, or community is first a leadership issue. The
direction, policies, mechanisms, platforms should be in place to foster the genetic variety. More
importantly leadership in practice should live by it.
Finally, adaptive capacity of a social structure is a cultural issue. Practices come from the culture, as
opposed to policies (espoused theory vs. theory in practice). So the culture has to be consciously led
towards practices that would foster variety. True leaders seek not uniformity or unanimity.
Originally published at http://adnihil.wordpress.com/2013/01/21/too-well-adapted-to-survive/