In the previous post, we explored the systemic principle of belonging. In this one, we focus on the systemic principle of order and address the following central question: What happens when someone belongs but occupies a place that is not rightfully theirs?
The systemic principle of order holds that each person occupies their place according to hierarchy and function. When this principle is in balance, systems and the individuals within them can move forward and co create effectively. However, when this balance is disrupted, symptoms begin to emerge and accumulate.
The Principle of Order
In every organization, beyond formal structures and job descriptions, there is an implicit architecture that sustains how the system functions. This architecture is not only about titles or reporting lines. It is about clarity of position, respect for sequence, and coherence between authority, responsibility and decision making.
From a systemic perspective, order is closely linked to hierarchy. Not hierarchy as domination or privilege, but as orientation. Those who came earlier hold a different place from those who arrived later. Those who carry strategic responsibility occupy a different position from those who execute operational tasks. Founders have a different place from successors. Senior leaders have a different place from their teams.
When this order is acknowledged and respected, the system tends to flow. Decisions are clearer. Accountability is more coherent. Energy is directed towards shared objectives rather than internal tension.
What happens when order is altered?
In practice, violations of order are more common than we might think.
They appear when:
- A team member assumes decision making authority that has not been formally or implicitly granted.
- A manager avoids responsibility and pushes decisions downward.
- A successor behaves as if they were the founder.
- A founder continues to intervene operationally after delegating authority.
- Informal power overrides formal responsibility.
- A new employee disregards the knowledge of those who built the organization.
In all these situations, the issue is not competence or intention. It is systemic position.
When someone occupies a place that does not correspond to their hierarchy or function, the system reacts. Typical symptoms include:
- Confusion around decision making.
- Hidden rivalries or power struggles.
- Resistance to change initiatives.
- Overload in some roles and underutilization in others.
- Loss of respect for formal authority.
- Chronic conflict between departments or levels.
Very often, organizations attempt to solve these issues through process redesign, new KPIs or additional meetings. While these tools can be useful, they do not address the systemic root if the underlying order remains disturbed.
A systemic intervention: restoring order
Working with the Principle of Order does not mean reinforcing rigid structures. It means clarifying positions.
In systemic interventions, we explore questions such as:
- Who carries ultimate responsibility for this decision?
- Who came first in the system and what place does that give them?
- Who is taking on responsibilities that do not belong to them?
- Who is not occupying the place that corresponds to their role?
- Where is authority unclear or divided?
Often, simply making these dynamics visible generates relief. When a founder publicly acknowledges the leadership of a successor, order begins to restore itself. When a manager clearly reclaims responsibility, their team can step back into an appropriate operational role. When boundaries are clarified, tensions decrease.
Order is not about control. It is about coherence.
Let us ground this in specific examples that we have encountered dozens of times in our daily work with organizations of all sizes, sectors and countries.
Example 1: The retired founder who never really leaves
The CEO of a second-generation family business retires and appoints her daughter as the new CEO. He steps back formally, allowing her daughter to lead the company.
However, things do not unfold as planned. Vice Presidents and board members continue to consult the former CEO, seeking his advice and direction. He is more than willing to provide it. At the same time, they do not fully listen to, consult or follow the new CEO’s leadership. The daughter begins to feel powerless and insufficiently legitimised in her role.
Systemically, the place of the former CEO has not been released, and the place of the new CEO has not been fully acknowledged. The result: loss of efficiency, erosion of trust, increased conflict, and rising tension among shareholders.
Example 2: The over responsible senior leader
A senior leader in an international company not only fulfils her responsibilities diligently, but also takes on most of the tasks that belong to her director, who, in her view, is rarely present and contributes little.
She frequently expresses how unfair and exhausting the situation feels. Yet, at the same time, she continues to assume her director’s responsibilities, making decisions that do not formally belong to her role.
Systemically, a loop is created: the more she takes over, the less the director steps in. The less the director steps in, the more she feels compelled to compensate. Over time, burnout increases, complaints intensify, and dissatisfaction with the organisation grows.
In both examples, belonging is not the issue. Both individuals belong. What is disturbed is order.
Why the Principle of Order matters
When order is respected, people know where they stand. This clarity reduces anxiety. It supports trust. It allows collaboration to emerge without hidden power negotiations draining the system’s energy.
When order is violated, the system spends enormous resources compensating for the imbalance. Energy that could be directed towards innovation, strategy or growth becomes trapped in internal friction.
As with belonging, order is not a theoretical abstraction. It is a practical lens. Before redesigning structures or launching transformation programmes, it is worth asking: Is everyone in their right place in terms of hierarchy and function?
At Metaweaves, we integrate the Principle of Order into all our systemic interventions. We observe where roles are blurred, where authority is misplaced, and where hierarchy has become either rigid or invisible. Because when order is restored, the system regains orientation. And when a system has orientation, it can move forward with strength and coherence.
If, as you read this, you recognize signs of confusion around authority, responsibility or hierarchy in your organization, the system may be signalling a disturbance in order. Sometimes, the first step is not to change the structure, but to clarify the place of each part within it.
