The Link Between Communication Pathways and Power Structure
This is another section taken from my (work in progress) book. It explores the link between communication pathways (Conways Law) with power structure. I've started a signup page so if you're interested in helping, and would like to reading the material early, I'd encourage you to signup.
Let jump in ...
To fully grasp the implications of Conway’s Law, it is essential to understand the connection between communication pathways and organizational structure. Kane’s Law provides an important foundation here: an organization’s structure dictates the distribution of power, which in turn shapes how communication flows. These communication patterns are not passive reflections but active reinforcers of the underlying power dynamics.
In traditional organizations, structure often follows a hierarchical model: departments, teams, and individuals report to specific managers, and information flows in a top-down or bottom-up manner. The more complex and layered the structure, the more fragmented communication becomes, particularly between departments or teams that do not regularly interact (Galbraith, 2014). These fragmented pathways reinforce centralized power by limiting the flow of information to decision-makers at the top, creating bottlenecks and delaying responses to challenges.
In contrast, organizations with flatter structures or cross-functional teams tend to have more fluid communication channels. Teams collaborate across traditional boundaries, enabling them to design systems that are more integrated and aligned with user needs or strategic goals. For example, in Agile organizations, cross- functional teams communicate freely, without bureaucratic barriers, allowing them to build cohesive and adaptive systems (Coplien & Harrison, 2004). This open communication not only reflects a decentralized power structure but also sustains it by empowering teams to make informed decisions autonomously.
The critical insight from Conway’s Law is that if an organization’s structure limits communication—whether through silos, departmental barriers, or hierarchical bottlenecks—the systems it produces will reflect these limitations. The quality of communication is a direct predictor of the quality of outcomes (Conway, 1968). Conversely, organizations that actively redesign their communication pathways can challenge entrenched power dynamics, fostering innovation and adaptability.