"We have created trouble for ourselves in organizations by confusing control with order"
About this Quote
Margaret Wheatley challenges a common managerial reflex: to equate order with tighter control. Control is about command, prediction, and compliance; order is about coherence, patterns, and the capacity to function well amid change. When leaders conflate the two, they often build bureaucracies that feel orderly on paper yet generate confusion and inertia in practice. The effort to regulate every variable breeds bottlenecks, fear of initiative, and a proliferation of exceptions that then require even more rules. Ironically, the pursuit of control creates disorder.
Wheatley draws on living systems and complexity science, where stability comes not from rigid oversight but from self-organization guided by simple rules and shared purpose. In complex environments, information must flow quickly, decisions must be made close to the work, and people need the autonomy to adapt. Under these conditions, order emerges as consistent patterns of behavior aligned with a common aim. It is a dynamic order, resilient because it can evolve.
Look at healthy agile teams: a few clear constraints such as sprint cadence, definition of done, and customer value provide a structure. Within that frame, teams self-organize, learn rapidly, and coordinate through transparency rather than permission. The result is more reliable delivery and fewer firefights than in tightly controlled, stage-gated environments. The same logic shows up in effective crisis response networks and open-source communities; clarity of purpose, information-rich environments, and trust produce coordination without heavy-handed control.
This does not dismiss the need for constraints. Safety standards, legal obligations, and ethical boundaries matter. The distinction is between minimum critical specifications that enable coherence vs exhaustive directives that smother it. Leaders who seek order should invest in shared purpose, clear principles, simple interfaces, and strong feedback loops; they should remove fear, reward learning, and let authority migrate to expertise. When organizations stop confusing control with order, they trade brittle predictability for robust adaptability, and trouble gives way to intelligent, self-sustaining performance.
Wheatley draws on living systems and complexity science, where stability comes not from rigid oversight but from self-organization guided by simple rules and shared purpose. In complex environments, information must flow quickly, decisions must be made close to the work, and people need the autonomy to adapt. Under these conditions, order emerges as consistent patterns of behavior aligned with a common aim. It is a dynamic order, resilient because it can evolve.
Look at healthy agile teams: a few clear constraints such as sprint cadence, definition of done, and customer value provide a structure. Within that frame, teams self-organize, learn rapidly, and coordinate through transparency rather than permission. The result is more reliable delivery and fewer firefights than in tightly controlled, stage-gated environments. The same logic shows up in effective crisis response networks and open-source communities; clarity of purpose, information-rich environments, and trust produce coordination without heavy-handed control.
This does not dismiss the need for constraints. Safety standards, legal obligations, and ethical boundaries matter. The distinction is between minimum critical specifications that enable coherence vs exhaustive directives that smother it. Leaders who seek order should invest in shared purpose, clear principles, simple interfaces, and strong feedback loops; they should remove fear, reward learning, and let authority migrate to expertise. When organizations stop confusing control with order, they trade brittle predictability for robust adaptability, and trouble gives way to intelligent, self-sustaining performance.
Quote Details
| Topic | Management |
|---|
More Quotes by Margaret
Add to List





