How is Conway's law related to Larman's laws?

How is Conway's law related to Larman's laws?

Conway’s Law and Larman’s Laws of Organizational Behavior both explore the relationship between an organization's structure and the outcomes it produces, particularly in terms of system design and the success or failure of change initiatives like Agile transformations. There is absolutely some commonality between both Conway's Law and Larman's Laws, but how are they similar or different? Let's dig in ...

1. The Impact of Organizational Structure

Conway’s Law: This law emphasizes that the structure of an organization and the communication patterns within it will shape the design of the systems it produces. For example, if teams within a company are siloed, their systems will likely reflect this, resulting in disjointed or modular systems.
Larman’s Laws: Larman’s first law states that “Organizations are implicitly optimized to avoid changing the status quo of the structure.” This means that the existing organizational structure strongly resists any attempts at change, including Agile transformations. Like Conway’s Law, it suggests that the structure of the organization has a powerful influence on outcomes, whether it’s system design or organizational change.
Relation: Both laws underscore that an organization's structure directly impacts its outcomes, whether in system design (Conway) or in the success of Agile transformations and change initiatives (Larman). Structural change is crucial in both contexts.

2. Resistance to Change and Structure Preservation

Conway’s Law: In practice, Conway’s Law highlights that any rigid communication structure within an organization may produce software systems that are equally rigid and hard to adapt or scale. This happens because the underlying organizational communication doesn’t facilitate collaboration across different units.
Larman’s Laws: Larman’s third law suggests that the status quo of middle managers is preserved by default. Middle management often resists structural changes that would empower teams (as Agile promotes), because these changes threaten their roles. This resistance mirrors how Conway’s Law describes resistance to changing communication patterns in organizations, which can limit adaptability.
Relation: Both laws point out that organizational structures resist change. Conway focuses on how communication patterns create rigid systems, while Larman focuses on how structural inertia prevent meaningful change, especially in Agile contexts.

3. Culture and Structure

Conway’s Law: Although Conway’s Law primarily focuses on how organizational structures influence system design, it indirectly implies that organizational culture is shaped by these structures. For example, a siloed structure promotes a culture of separation and limited collaboration.
Larman’s Fourth Law: Larman explicitly states, “Culture follows structure.” This means that without altering the fundamental structure of the organization, any attempt to change the culture (e.g., moving to a more collaborative, Agile mindset) will fail. The structure must be addressed first.
Relation: Both laws assert that structure comes before culture. Changing organizational culture without addressing structural changes is ineffective, whether the goal is to foster collaboration in Agile teams (Larman) or to design more integrated, adaptive systems (Conway).

4. Scaling Challenges

Conway’s Law: In large organizations, scaling communication across multiple teams is difficult, leading to challenges in building integrated systems. Teams working in isolation often create systems that don’t fit together well.
Larman’s Laws: Larman’s laws also highlight the difficulties in scaling Agile across large organizations. The existing power structures and middle management will resist change, making it hard to scale Agile practices without reorganizing the company’s structure.
Relation: Both laws highlight the difficulties of scaling in large organizations due to entrenched structures. Whether the focus is on system design (Conway) or Agile implementation (Larman), both point out that structural issues must be addressed to successfully scale.

Conway’s Law and Larman’s Laws both emphasize that the structure of an organization significantly shapes its outcomes—whether it’s the architecture of the systems it produces or the success of its Agile transformation. Both argue that without addressing underlying structural issues, efforts to improve system design or implement Agile will face significant obstacles. While Conway’s Law focuses on the relationship between communication patterns and system architecture, Larman’s Laws explore how structures and resistance to change influence the success of Agile transformations. Both laws suggest that structure is the foundation that must be changed to achieve true transformation.

Next week I'm going to bring a third document into the mix. This third document was written in 2006, and continues along the same theme of change being hard and disruptive!

Back to blog

Leave a comment

Please note, comments need to be approved before they are published.