Podular. Chaordic. Fractal. There are more than a few modesl for self-organization (with a few overlaps). What are the principles individuals should adopt to successfully adapt to the dynamics of their environments? What are the obstacles that get in the way (or that people let get in the way)? What challenges come with scale? Who's doing it well, and how?

One of my favorite topics! I'm currently looking for examples of self-organizing learning "entities" that are more than communities, but less than schools or traditional businesses. Any suggestions of where I should start digging?

Matthew, one technology such entities might be using is likely to be adopters Mozilla's Open Badges project. wiki.mozilla.org.

I would also look into the topic of MOOCs: Massively Open Online Courses. There are some challenges to MOOCs, but part of me thinks that the challenges are a) a lack of maturity around what success looks like; b) perhaps it's hard for sponsors and/or critics to let go of a more established model of what online education is supposed to look like... @downes is an active proponent of MOOCs. I'm hardly qualified to talk to the self-organizing nature of them, but perhaps he and others could... chronicle.com

Aaron: that's a really big question. Perhaps I can start with unpacking some assumptions/axioms in your framing:

1. Self-organization is an important goal in dynamic systems.
2. Self-organization is best described by models (essentially algorithms/procedures + structures)
3. Models are transferable from one context to another
4. It is possible to recognize a model from the inside
5. It is possible to create an operating practice by combining several forms of self-organization principles
6. Applying self-organization principles/models at a personal/individual level will (eventually) create self-organization at scale

These axioms will hold variably in different contexts; perhaps we can ask: "how do we find the best model for here/now?"

Perhaps Self Organizing in non-linear dynamic systems is the intention bounded by Authentic Constraints. It is not the goal of the system.

I think modeling is a way to gain insights (based on assumptions) into a self organizing phenomenon.

Models are transferable from one context to another when the rules of self organizing remain somewhat the same (approximations again). Never accurate.

Perhaps it is possible to create an operating practice by combining several forms of self organizing principles.

And applying self organization principles/models at a personal/individual level would eventually create self organizing at scale. However, we might be 'scale free' right from the start.

@_arvind I like the axioms you've pulled out. They certainly represent my assumptions (bias?) that there can be "guiding principles" for emergent behavior. I especially like the question (because you took it meta) "how do we find the best model for here & now?"

@TheDesignKata I think you nudge towards a response to this very question with your last post, "Perhaps it is possible to form an operating practice by combining several forms of self organizing principles."

So I (attempt to) ask more concretely, "what are some principles of self organization that apply to specific domains or contexts?

I think we can state a few mapping principles:

_ networked/p2p emergent models apply when outcomes need to be the same for everyone (e.g. torrent, wikipedia)
_ fractal models apply when the population is too big for equal AND timely participation, and understanding/decisions have to be made about everything, in the same way
_ podular models apply when engaging with an ecosystem, but at many different points and in many different ways, and there is the need/possibility for advantages through sharing resources (i.e. having community)
_ chaordic models apply when a group of entities need to collaborate for mutual benefit, but with sufficient openness for mutation/innovation and hence competition

no single model appears to have it all.

corollary: some models will not scale without institutional contracts and infrastructures.

corollary 2: some models will require unequal and specialised participation.

note: i'm defining these mappings primarily in terms of outcomes. this says nothing about the roles that particular people have to take within these models. i'm assuming that the outcome/intention should be the primary selector, but i really have no good reason for believing that other than that goals are a good way to align people and their intentions.

some more meta questions might help:

1. do we need multiple scales of outcomes?
2. what is the domain of complexity the group is operating in?
3. is there a minimum participation threshold?
4. is specialization possible?

corollary 3: models can be combined at different scales: e.g. networked emergence at the individual level, podular for groups, chaordic for a group of institutions, fractal for nation-states. this *might* lead to individuals selecting elements of operating principles to combine in their practice, but it would be different from creating self-organization by combining principles from the ground up.

@Mathew Milan . If you aren't familiar with Sugata Mitra. Nice TED video on Self Organizing Learning Environments ted.com He is working with poor Indian kids, but I think the principles are generally applicable to most learning environments.

The key insight is that 1 to 1 computer access is less effective than 1 to 4 computer access. It's the peer problem solving that triggers real learning. I haven't yet seen this in highered education, but I have a feeling it probably emerge sooner or later.

In fact it's merely the "study group" at a different scale with different technology.

Esther Dyson (@edyson) has a great article where she alludes to what I care about most: the intersection of democracy, self-organization and learning: "People should be free to the maximum extent to pursue their own mission – much like the milling crowd of performers in the recent Olympic opening ceremony (versus the perfectly synchronized Chinese ceremony in 2008). Ultimately, these individuals 'self-organized' to create entire new industries, the National Health Service, and great music, among other things."

project-syndicate.org