Power dynamics in systems are a fascinating topic.
It's relatively easy to observe the dynamics between two individuals or between two communities in disagreement. But it’s far less obvious and more challenging to comprehend what happens in the power relationship between an individual and an entire community.
What are the power dynamics at play in these One-to-Many connections, and how do they work?
A group, network, or community obviously holds more power than a single individual, so how do we preserve personal integrity and wisely use our inner power when we find ourselves in unhealthy power dynamics with a collective?
One-to-Many can take many forms.
When someone gives a presentation or a conference, it’s a One-to-Many relationship. One person speaks in front of a group, or one person opposes public opinion. Even what I’m doing now—writing this and sharing it—creates a One-to-Many relationship. By posting this on my website, I strengthen the connection between my personal business and my network.
However, when we sit around a table in a group discussion, like in a board meeting or a co-creative workshop, it’s usually not a One-to-Many dynamic. It’s something else—a shared power dynamic with added complexity, more aptly described as a Many-to-Many model.
Hierarchical structures in business and at home operate on the principle of One-to-Many. A boss manages a team. This is also true for many religions, political systems, educational structures, and the military. There is typically one main leader responsible for the group—a boss, speaker, guru, teacher, leader, or belief system that holds authority over the entire group. This is what we call a One-to-Many power dynamic.
To form a group, you need at least a few people. A group can have a clear leader or not.
Let’s imagine a group of five people for this example.
You could have two types of groups: centralized power or decentralized power. In a centralized power structure, if you have a boss or leader, they hold more authority and control over the whole group. They have the 'final word,' so to speak.
Alternatively, in a decentralized power model, each individual is a sovereign leader. This is often the case in workers’ cooperatives, for example.
Or, consider shared projects like building an ecovillage, where five people or more have invested energy, resources, and time somewhat equally. They may have a shared decision-making process in place, where each individual holds the same perceived and exercised power. They all share responsibility, authority, and power within the group.
These models are more complex and challenging. The more sovereign leaders co-create, the more potential there is for ego conflicts if not managed properly. This is why so many systems maintain centralized power, and why true shared power dynamics and network-like structures are rare.
Most projects with purely decentralized power dynamics, where everyone is a leader (what some might call anarchy), tend to fail. Even anarchy needs some form of systemic coherence. It needs to be organized in a way that maintains interdependence and connection between sub-systems or leaders.
There is a network aspect to it. A network is like an invisible structure that ensures the whole remains coherent, and that each leader contributes to the group in the most efficient and meaningful way. Even if everyone is free to do as they please, there’s still a group identity or shared purpose that defines their community or network.
Even anarchy must, in some way, be ‘organized.’
We know exactly how to organize systems in a centralized way with one main leader or a hierarchical model. We are familiar with the benefits and limitations of doing so.
We already understand that to change the world, we need to change how power is distributed within systems. To succeed, we must learn to collaborate and co-create more effectively. To enable real and meaningful processes of co-leadership and co-responsibility, we must explore and implement more decentralized power models in our organizations and social systems.
How do we collaborate or co-create within a business ecosystem where no one is the 'boss'? There’s no power-over dynamic; everyone is a leader and a sovereign co-creator with equal power and influence. How would that work?
This model might work easily for small groups or simple projects. Five people jamming together one evening is a beautiful example of co-creation and co-leadership. Everyone feels empowered and contributes their uniqueness to the group’s song or project.
But as the complexity of the project or the number of leaders increases, the entire system can become chaotic, intense, and even a bit scary. Imagine a macro co-creation project with 5 million co-leaders and sovereign co-creators—it's harder to envision, isn’t it?
Co-managing a cooperative of five engineers with decentralized power dynamics is vastly different from transforming an entire region with 5 million co-leaders. Few can imagine how that could be done.
And many would be terrified at the idea of a macro co-creation project or community with 5 million sovereign leaders, where no one has power over anyone else. Just thinking about it might provoke uncomfortable emotional reactions in some.
It feels scary to have no clear authority figure maintaining social order and structure. Without a leader with power over us, no one can protect us, reassure us, or tell us what to believe or do. No one can take responsibility for our actions. This is why the thought of living in a system without centralized, hierarchical power distribution can be so terrifying.
This is why we don’t yet have a social macro-system based on shared, decentralized power dynamics. It’s not because the 'elite' are greedy or corrupt, but because we are scared to imagine a world without higher authority figures, where we all have access to our own free will, inner power, and choice.
Leaders exist not only because they want to be in power but because we unconsciously desire leaders. We want systems that protect us, guide us, and tell us what to believe.
We, as a collective, enable these centralized systems because they feel safer and more comfortable. Most people would rather have a leader over them than take on the responsibility of being leaders themselves. It feels easier and more secure. This is why we live in a power-abusive system and a distorted reality. It’s not because leaders fear losing control, but because we are afraid to take responsibility for our own power and will.
We are more scared to lose our leaders than we are to live in a dictatorship. We fear owning our inner power and becoming co-leaders more than being under the control of someone else, even if it harms us.
There are many reasons for this, both good and bad.
But primarily, it's because we simply don’t know how to do things differently. Our entire lives, we’ve been programmed to follow systems where something or someone has power over us—be it our family, school, job, or government.
We rarely practice authentic shared power dynamics. We don’t spend much time participating in spaces where no one is the leader. We seldom experience what it feels like to be a true co-leader and co-creator in a group where power is genuinely decentralized.
In most systems we participate in, there is a leader or a boss of some sort. It doesn't matter if we play the role of the leader or the follower; the point is, most systems in our global culture are based on centralized and hierarchical power dynamics. Sometimes, we can't even imagine it being any different.
We don’t have enough lived experiences in our personal lives where everyone feels truly empowered to be a real co-leader and authentic co-creator in a group. We often feel insecure about spaces where there’s no predetermined power structure. It may feel chaotic, or even too superficial. It’s destabilizing, and we often don’t know how to exist in systems where we all have equal access to our unlimited power and free will—where no one has authority or control over anyone else.
Mastery requires practice. If we want to learn how to be co-leaders and co-creators with others, we need to create contexts where we actually practice these dynamics. If we never participate in settings or groups where everyone shares equal access to power, how can we ever master it or truly know how it works?
Operating efficiently, coherently, and safely in a network or community with decentralized power requires time and effort. Without groups or projects that truly embody this philosophy—where each individual maintains their own power and self-integrity while co-creating with others—how can we expect the system to become fully collaborative and decentralized?
If no one knows how to do it, and there is nowhere to practice, how can we become authentic co-leaders and co-creators of our shared reality? Is it wishful thinking to expect systemic change if the humans shaping the system haven’t first changed themselves or put in the effort to explore different ways of distributing power and co-leading?
If we want a different system, we must learn how to create it differently. If we believe power is the problem, we must first master our own power and take full responsibility for our personal reality. We shouldn't wait for our leaders to change; we should learn how to become authentic leaders ourselves.
And becoming a leader is hard. Becoming a co-leader is even harder. Being a true co-creator, where everyone else is considered a sovereign leader as well, is a next-level challenge.
To play new, difficult, or challenging games, we must first learn the rules and the purpose of the game. And we must practice. The more we play, the better we become.
The more time and energy we spend with groups and communities where we can experience different ways of collaborating and co-creating, the more we learn how to be natural co-leaders and co-creators. The more we understand, the more we can teach others, and the faster we’ll learn how to scale these systems safely and meaningfully at the community or network level.
If we all mastered how to be real co-creators and co-leaders in something as simple as a shared project with five sovereign beings, we could transform the inefficiencies of our collective macro-system much faster than expected. Once you know how to do it with five people—where you hold your power and unconditionally honor the power of others—it becomes easy to envision how it could work for a community of five million people.
It’s not the system that’s supposed to guide, change, protect, or control you. You are supposed to be the one co-creating the system that enables you to change, protect, and control yourself and better care for those around you—with your own inner power, will, and free choice.
Comments