EDITORIAL - The Edge of Chaos -

Welcome to this week’s Editorial. I’m thrilled you’re joining me today. I want to dive into a topic that’s central to how we innovate, lead, and navigate our constantly changing world. And the metaphor I love using for this is the image of a tightrope walker.

So, picture yourself on a tightrope, arms stretched out, wobbling just enough to keep your balance. It’s a little scary, but it’s also exhilarating, right? Because you’re not frozen in place—you’re in motion, you’re making micro-adjustments, constantly shifting between the pull of order on one side and the lure of chaos on the other. That’s the sweet spot where the magic happens. Today, we’re going to explore why it’s so powerful to hang out at this “edge of chaos”, what change blindness is and how it can trip us up if we’re not careful, and how all of this helps us become better leaders and innovators.

Balancing on the Edge of Chaos

Let’s start with this idea of the edge of chaos. I love how complexity science describes it as a sweet spot between rigid order and total mayhem. On one side, if things are too structured—like an organization with layers upon layers of bureaucracy—creativity gets stifled. People get stuck following the same old processes, or they’re terrified of breaking the rules. On the other side, if there’s too much chaos, everything becomes so scattered that no real progress is made. It’s like everyone’s running around in different directions without a shared purpose.

 

But right at the edge? That’s where we get both innovation and stability. There’s enough structure to keep us moving together, but enough freedom to experiment and try bold ideas. Nature offers plenty of examples: there’s a well-known concept called the intermediate disturbance hypothesis, which basically shows that ecosystems hit peak biodiversity—peak life—when there’s a moderate amount of disruption. Too little disturbance, and the system gets stale. Too much, and it collapses.

 

The same logic applies to businesses and teams. Think of a company like Google. They famously gave employees “20% time” to explore big, wild ideas. That was a bit of chaos sprinkled into their daily work. But they also had a framework in place—enough organization to decide which of these ideas would move forward. It wasn’t anarchy, but it wasn’t stifling order, either. It was a dynamic balance, right on that edge.

When Order Becomes a Straightjacket

 

Now, I want to be clear: order by itself isn’t a bad thing. We need some structure to keep us grounded and consistent. The problem is when order turns into a straightjacket, when people say, “We’ve always done it this way,” and shut down new ideas.

 

In some organizations, there’s a heavy reliance on rules, processes, and top-down directives. That can create efficiency in the short run, but it can also kill spontaneity and discourage experimentation. Leaders who micromanage end up with teams that follow the script but don’t bother to innovate. Everyone’s so busy coloring inside the lines that no one asks, “Hey, can we draw something completely different?”

 

I’m guessing you’ve seen this or felt this before—times when rigid policies or endless approvals made it feel impossible to introduce new thinking. So yes, order is useful—until