How Evolutionary Thinking Can Transform the Workplace 1
This View of Business: How Evolutionary Thinking Can Transform the Workplace
evolution-institute.orgwww.evolution-institute.org How Evolutionary Thinking Can Transform the Workplace 2
Table of Contents
03 Contributors Introduction: How Evolutionary Thinking Can Transform the Workplace 05 by David Sloan Wilson, Mark Van Vugt & Max Beilby Tinbergen’s four questions and variance explained: Why business (and all 08 behavioral science) needs evolutionary theory by Sandeep Mishra Evolutionary Psychology and Organizational Science 10 by Phanish Puranam Moral Sentiments 12 by J.W. Stoelhorst
Are Modern Businesses A Mismatch? 14 by Mark van Vugt Curiosity as a Commandment for Business School Curricula 16 by Kevin Kniffin The face of a leader: honest signal, or mismatch? 18 by John Antonakis
Building trust in diverse groups 20 by Paulo Finuras
The Evolved Decision Maker 22 by Max Beilby
Design organizations compatible with human nature 24 by Stephen Colarelli
The Gendered Organisation 27 by Nigel Nicholson
The Business World Needs Multilevel Selection 29 by David Sloan Wilson
The Joy of X 31 by Rory Sutherland
evolution-institute.org How Evolutionary Thinking Can Transform the Workplace 3
Contributors
David Sloan Wilson Mark van Vugt Max Beilby
David Sloan Wilson is SUNY Mark van Vugt is Professor of Max Beilby is a Management Distinguished Professor of Evolutionary Psychology, Work and Organizational Psychologist Biology and Anthropology at and Organizational Psychology at and author of the Darwinian Binghamton University. He is the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam in Business blog. also President of the Evolution the Netherlands and a Research Institute and Editor in Chief of Associate at the University of This View of Life Magazine. Oxford, England.
Sandeep Mishra Phanish Puranam J.W. Stoelhorst
Sandeep Mishra is an Phanish Puranam is the Roland J.W. Stoelhorst is Associate Assistant Professor of Berger Professor of Strategy Professor of Strategy and Business Administration at & Organization Design at Organization at the University of the University of Regina. INSEAD. He obtained his PhD Amsterdam. His research focuses Mishra’s research is primarily at Penn (Wharton), and was on evolutionary foundations focused on understanding previously professor at London of social science theory and decision-making under risk and Business School. the application of evolutionary uncertainty, including gambling. theory to management and organization.
evolution-institute.org How Evolutionary Thinking Can Transform the Workplace 4
Kevin Kniffin John Antonakis Paulo Finuras
Kevin Kniffin is an applied John Antonakis is Professor of Paulo Finuras is an expert in behavioral scientist at Cornell Organizational Behavior in the International & Intercultural University who teaches and Faculty of Business and Economics Management and research researches the mechanisms of the University of Lausanne, fellow at the Department that facilitate cooperation Switzerland. Professor Antonakis’ of Social Sciences, in within groups. Kniffin has research is currently focused on ULHT, Lisbon. His research conducted research in diverse leadership development, power, focuses on Organizational field settings, including charisma (watch a TEDx talk on and Interpersonal Trust, firehouses, gyms, and new the topic here), personality, and Evolutionary Psychology, Bio- automobile dealerships. research methods. Leadership, and Bio-Sociology.
Stephen Colarelli Nigel Nicholson Rory Sutherland
Stephen Colarelli is professor Nigel Nicholson is a senior Rory Sutherland is Vice of psychology at Central Professor at London Business Chairman of Ogilvy & Mather Michigan University. His School, where he has wide- UK and co-founder of research is concerned with ranging involvements in research, Ogilvychange, a behavioral how evolutionary theory executive education and science practice. He co-heads a and evolutionary psychology business. He writes, teaches, team of psychology graduates can influence how we think speaks and advises on leadership, looking for “butterfly effects” about, conduct research family business, biography and in consumer behaviour, small on, and manage behavior in legacy, executive development, contextual changes that have organizations. management in finance, and enormous effects on the interpersonal skills. decisions people make.
evolution-institute.org How Evolutionary Thinking Can Transform the Workplace 5
This View of Business: How Evolutionary Thinking Can Transform the Workplace by Mark Van Vugt, David Sloan Wilson & Max Beilby
This View of Life helps to demonstrate the environments or the forces of genetic value of an evolutionary perspective for and cultural evolution that shape the many areas of society, including healthcare, behaviors of all people, in and out of the sustainability, and education. Surprisingly, a workplace. Rethinking business and domain that has yet to embrace evolutionary management from an evolutionary perspective thinking is that of business and management. can have profound implications at all scales, from the wellbeing of individual employees, to True, metaphors and phrases such as the performance of firms, to the creation of a “survival of the fittest”, “creative destruction”, sustainable global economy. and “firm selection” have been tossed around for decades, suggesting that evolutionary To catalyze this process, we are initiating a forces are at work in the business world. series of articles and interviews titled: “This However, these analogies don’t even begin to View of Business: How Evolutionary Thinking appreciate the complexity of business social Can Transform the Workplace”. To inaugurate
evolution-institute.org How Evolutionary Thinking Can Transform the Workplace 6 the series, we posed the following question providing a toolkit for navigating the to a number of evolutionary thought leaders: world of business. “What is the single greatest insight that an evolutionary perspective offers to business?” We end with a note on the status of women Their answers give a taste of what will be in the business and management professions. explored in greater detail in the rest of the series. We made a strong effort to include female commentators in our inaugural article but We hope that this effort will go a failed: First, because women are sadly in the long way toward catalyzing reforms minority among those who are thinking about in business education and management business from an evolutionary perspective; development. We believe that evolutionary and second, because those we asked were approaches should have a prominent role in too busy—perhaps fulfilling other requests the curriculum of Business Schools as well similar to ours! Luckily, in our case we will as in allied fields such as in Management be able to correct the imbalance in future and Organizational Sciences. Likewise, we articles and interviews in the series and to think evolutionary insights will be valuable address gender issues in the workplace from to business leaders and other professionals, an evolutionary perspective.
evolution-institute.org How Evolutionary Thinking Can Transform the Workplace 7
Tinbergen’s four questions and variance explained: Why business (and all behavioral science) needs evolutionary theory by Sandeep Mishra
Understanding behavior is immensely question offers a different perspective on complicated. Since the middle of the 20th why and/or how behavior comes to be. Two century (after the modern synthesis1), the are “how” questions, about mechanism: predominant understanding of the “sources” of behavior centered on the “nature” vs. (1) How do proximate mechanisms give rise “nurture” debate. In short, this debate is to behavior? (proximate explanation) about whether behavior is best attributed to genetic inputs or environmental factors. (2) How do developmental factors influence Of course, this dichotomy has been shown behavior? (developmental explanation) time and time again to be a “straw man” The other two are “why” questions, about the argument; all behavior (and all traits) fundamental evolutionary sources of behavior: are necessarily products of complicated interactions (i.e., nature via nurture).2 (3) Why did a particular behavior evolve However, this debate highlights the central over time? (functional/ultimate explanation) goal of the behavioral sciences – explaining variance in behavior. In a perfect world (4) Why did evolutionary history gave rise to where we could predict 100% of all behavior, a particular behavior in certain species but we would necessarily have a complete not others? (phylogenetic explanation) understanding of all the sources of variance that give rise to behavior. The virtue of these four questions is that it highlights that there are always multiple What does variance explained have to do answers to questions about the causes of with evolutionary thinking and business? In behavior. For example, we might ask, why 1963, the Nobel Laureate and well-known do some birds sing? There are necessarily evolutionary biologist Nikolaas “Niko” multiple answers: some sing because of the Tinbergen posed four questions based on release of particular hormones (a proximate evolutionary thinking that would completely explanation); some sing because they change how we understand behavior.3 Each were exposed to the songs of their parents
evolution-institute.org How Evolutionary Thinking Can Transform the Workplace 8 during development (a developmental ecology and ethology (where it originated), explanation); some sing because individuals surprisingly few human behavioral scientists who sang more attractive songs had more in any discipline (let alone business) are offspring, and thus, higher biological fitness aware of these four questions. Fewer still (a functional/ultimate explanation); some actually use these four questions to guide sing because their evolutionary ancestors their work. This ignorance of Tinbergen’s branched off from non-songbirds because work is highly problematic, because many of natural selection or genetic drift (a of the “debates” and “controversies” phylogenetic explanation).4 All of these in behavioral science are a product of explanations are complementary; together researchers talking past each other with they provide a richer account of the causes different explanations. Mainstream social of behavior. psychology, for example, is focused on understanding proximate mechanisms Although Tinbergen’s four questions are that guide behavior, whereas evolutionary taken for granted in the field of behavioral psychology is focused on functional
Any behavioral science—including business—that does not acknowledge, understand, and utilize Tinbergen’s four evolutionary questions to guide research will simply be leaving variance left to be explained on the table, and will be fundamentally limited as a result.
questions. Neither is the “right” approach that does not acknowledge, understand, – both (along with developmental and and utilize Tinbergen’s four evolutionary phylogenetic explanations) are necessary questions to guide research will simply be to truly explain behavior fully (that is, to leaving variance left to be explained on the account for more variance in behavior)5. table, and will be fundamentally limited as Any behavioral science—including business— a result.
References 1. Huxley, J. (1942). Evolution: The modern synthesis. George Allen & Unwin: London. 2. Ridley, M. (2003). Nature via nurture: Genes, experience, and what makes us human. HarperCollins Publishers: New York. 3. Tinbergen, N. (1963). On aims and methods of ethology. Ethology, 20, 410-433. 4. Catchpole, C. K., & Slater, P. J. B. (2003). Bird song: Biological themes and variations. Cambridge University Press. 5. Mishra, S. (2014). Decision-making under risk: Integrating perspectives from biology, economics, and psychology. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 18, 280-307.
evolution-institute.org How Evolutionary Thinking Can Transform the Workplace 9
Evolutionary psychology and Organization Science by Phanish Puranam
I study how organizations work, and how when inaccurate, and choice processes to make them work better. One would think involve maximization. Beginning with a robust theory of human behavior would Herbert Simon, researchers in the fields of be a key element of my theoretical toolkit. management, economics and psychology Unfortunately, I don’t think I have one yet. have by today accumulated an enormous body of empirical evidence that points to One candidate for such a theory that the gross inaccuracies of the rational choice has enjoyed unwarranted longevity is model. So why is it still taught so widely in the so called “rational choice” model - in graduate programs in the social sciences which goals are exogenous and constant, (including management departments)? representations are unbiased even
Evolutionary psychology can help answer that most basic of questions in the social sciences- what goals do we pursue and where do they come from?
The answer is that we do not yet know of what is possible in terms of the kinds of what to replace it with. There is one clearly goals, belief structures and choice processes specified rational choice model. There are that humans have. Not to one each, as the many ways people actually deviate from it. rational choice approach does- but to a Which one (if indeed there is one) alternative plausible (and hopefully, tractable) few. Most should replace it is unclear. There are importantly, it can also explain why we have just too many degrees of freedom. Every these properties. proposed alternative to rational choice can immediately be (and usually is) criticized as As a working alternative to the rational being ad hoc. choice model, many of us either implicitly or explicitly adopt some variant This is where evolutionary psychology can of the following model (I certainly come to our rescue. It restricts the space do): individuals make choices that, in their
evolution-institute.org How Evolutionary Thinking Can Transform the Workplace 10 representations, increase the possibility well. Ideas about variation, selection of attaining goals that are currently and retention in the domain of business salient to them. This formulation does not competition have been developed assume constancy of goals, accuracy of extensively by Michael Hannan and John representation, or maximization of choice, Freeman, Richard Nelson and Sidney Winter, which makes it seem under-defined. and Daniel Levinthal. Methodologies, in But from evolutionary psychology, we can particular computational agent based learn about the set of possible goals, how modeling and behavioral experiments are and when they become salient, and the way another bridge between the fields. I choose we represent the path to their attainment. to highlight the link that I felt has been I routinely include Cosmides and Tooby’s somewhat overlooked. I am hopeful that paper1 in my graduate seminars now to help evolutionary psychology can help answer make this point. that most basic of questions in the social sciences- what goals do we pursue and Broader influences of evolutionary thinking where do they come from? on the organizational sciences exist as
References 1. Cosmides, L. and Tooby, J. (1994) Better than Rational: Evolutionary Psychology and the Invisible Hand, American Economic Review, 84(2): 327-332.
evolution-institute.org How Evolutionary Thinking Can Transform the Workplace 11
Moral Sentiments by J.W. Stoelhorst
The fundamental insight from evolutionary social interactions to arm’s length exchanges theory for business and management is that we mediated by an impersonal price mechanism. should design modern organizations to appeal The resulting picture is of a system in which we to our moral sentiments. are guided, ‘as if by an invisible hand’, towards a collectively optimal outcome despite, or This is a fundamental insight because it goes rather precisely because of, the fact that we against an intellectual doctrine that pervades pursue our self-interest in the face of ‘perfect much of economics and management science. competition’. Ever since Adam Smith, economists have recognized that our self-interest is bounded by There is no doubt that this narrative contains moral sentiments. Nevertheless, the dominant an important insight, namely that financial narrative in economics holds that human incentives are a powerful mechanism to align welfare is optimized in a system that maximally interests. But on an evolutionary view of exploits our self-interest. human nature, it is immediately clear that this cannot be the whole story of our welfare. The This economic narrative casts us in the role fundamental flaw of the economic narrative is of Homo economicus, a rational agent that that it discounts the central role of our ability single-mindedly pursues its self-interest to solve social dilemmas in explaining our without any regard for social norms or the welfare. Social dilemmas are a large class of welfare of others. Moreover, it reduces our situations in which there is a tension between
evolution-institute.org How Evolutionary Thinking Can Transform the Workplace 12 our (short term) individual self-interest and the both the lab and the field demonstrates that (long-term) collective interest. These dilemmas we often do solve them. Evolutionary social arise in the tragedy of the commons, the science explains this discrepancy. It explains provision of public goods, but also whenever how the cognitive mechanisms that help we engage in team production of the goods us solve social dilemmas evolved – moral that we exchange, as we have done throughout sentiments such as empathy, indignation and our evolutionary history and continue to do in shame. These sentiments are the result of an modern firms. evolutionary dynamic in which a combination of multi-level selection and gene-culture Game theory tells us that rational self- co-evolution conferred fitness advantages to interested individuals are unable to solve members of groups in which these sentiments social dilemmas. Yet, empirical evidence from became more widespread.
To maximize our welfare we should design organizations for Homo sapiens rather than for Homo economicus.
The upshot of this explanation is not just a we should appeal to the moral sentiments more accurate understanding of human nature, that we evolved specifically for this purpose. but also an alternative narrative of human They are what makes us human and the key welfare. In the evolutionary narrative it is not to our success. The policy implication is clear: arm’s-length exchange that is the primary to maximize our welfare we should design cause of our welfare, but our ability to solve organizations for Homo sapiens rather than for social dilemmas. Appeals to our self-interest Homo economicus. exacerbate these dilemmas. To solve them,
evolution-institute.org How Evolutionary Thinking Can Transform the Workplace 13
Are Modern Businesses a Mismatch? by Mark van Vugt
Are we humans perfectly fitted to the and safety. These were societies without modern business world? An evolutionary laws, institutions, and complex technology. perspective suggests this may not be the Behaviors were guided by habits, cultural case. An important concept in evolutionary norms, and informal leaders. Only since theory is mismatch. Mismatch occurs the agricultural revolution that took place when the environment that organisms are some 10,000 years ago – the last 1% of adapted to, via a long process of evolution human evolution – did our societies grow by natural selection, changes so quickly in scale and complexity. The Industrial and intensely that it hinders them to fulfil Revolution that paved way for the modern their reproductive goals. A mismatch business environment is even more recent example from nature is human-caused (dating back only about 250 years ago). It deforestation which has changed the produced multi-layered decision-making habitats of many species so profoundly that hierarchies, formal rules of conduct, and they are no longer able to thrive or even a sharp separation between one’s private survive in these altered environments. Yet and work life – conditions unknown to mismatch is equally important to describe our ancestors. We are currently in the human brains and bodies. More than 99% digital age causing many novel mismatch of human evolution took place within problems. In the small-scale societies where small scale societies – egalitarian hunter- humans evolved trust and cooperation were gatherer groups of 50-150 individuals that established on the basis of frequent face-to- roamed the savannahs looking for food face interactions. Yet these interactions are
evolution-institute.org How Evolutionary Thinking Can Transform the Workplace 14 increasingly lacking as remote workplace result from prolonged exposure to stressors arrangements have become the norm. that our immune system is poorly adapted Small-scale societies have no formal leaders to cope with. So, what to do about business and the status and power differences mismatch? First, we should acknowledge between individuals were minimal. Yet that our evolved small scale psychology modern organizations have CEO’s and poses constraints on the way we structure middle managers in place who in principle modern workplaces. Second, we should can control all aspects of your working life. design organizations in such a way that The result is the risk of job alienation and they either work with, or if this is impossible, power abuse. Finally, job stress and burnout work around our small-scale psychology.
The current appeal of boss-less organizations may be more than just a fad; instead it probably reflects a deeper desire for the organizational structures of the past.
Thus, work environments must offer coercion. The current appeal of boss-less plenty of room for physical movement and organizations may be more than just a fad; informal socializing. Leaders must operate instead it probably reflects a deeper desire with prestige and authority rather than for the organizational structures of the past.
References 1. Van Vugt, M., & Ahuja, A. (2011). Naturally selected: The evolutionary science of leadership. HarperBusiness. 2. Van Vugt, M., Hogan, R., & Kaiser, R. B. (2008). Leadership, followership, and evolution: some lessons from the past. American Psychologist, 63(3), 182. 3. Van Vugt, M., & Ronay, R. (2013). The evolutionary psychology of leadership: Theory, review, and roadmap. Organizational Psychology Review, 2041386613493635.
evolution-institute.org How Evolutionary Thinking Can Transform the Workplace 15
Curiosity as a Commandment for Business School Curricula by Kevin Kniffin
Understanding the evolutionary basis, the students this image from Ontogeny and though, for curiosity as a human universal Phylogeny. I show them the image after imporantly invites everyone to “Stay walking through a brief lesson on human Curious” is the two-word request that I leave evolution that highlights (a) the existence of on the screen when I’m done teaching my a common ancestral species for humans and semester-long take on Organizational chimpanzees and (b) the massive amount of Behavior, a core course in any Business time that has elapsed since that point. School curriculum. While I generally aim for my class to move Curiosity has gotten something of a close-up fast with a good measure of urgency, the in the past year with prominent publications image of a juvenile and adult chimpanzee like Harvard Business Review pushing is likely the one slide each semester when several stories that celebrate it. One title that I take the highest number of breaths while gets students’ attention is Warren Berger’s asking the students to consider what they “Why Curious People are Destined for the see. C-Suite” (referring to Chief-level positions such as Chief Executive Officer, Chief Earlier in the course, there are frequent Financial Officer, ...). references to evolutionary thinking – in fact, several articles on the syllabus The recent spotlight on curiosity is great but apply evolutionary psychology to it does typically leave out questions such as workplace dynamics [1-6] – but it’s not “if,” “why,” and “how” people are (or might until the capstone section that I show be) differentially curious. the conventional species-lineage chart and make the evolutionary case for staying For my part, I focus on the “why” and apply curious. an evolutionary perspective to propose that we (humans) are instinctively or naturally Outside of business schools, evolutionists inclined to be curious and that various including Peter Gray have made strong environmental factors are responsible for cases that celebrate, comparably, the blinkering or dampening levels of curiosity evolutionary bases for why play is that are otherwise evolved. universal – and instinctual – across humans. I rest my argument conceptually on the Curiosity isn’t the only driver of play, but it’s hat of “neoteny” – the retention of juvenile worthwhile to recognize that being curious characteristics into adulthood – and show is playful.
evolution-institute.org How Evolutionary Thinking Can Transform the Workplace 16
Business School students understandably it is likely to boost chances for any kind of and sensibly tend to keep a close internship or full-time job of interest. and persistent focus on their career development. For example, it’s clear that Consequently, when “HBR” advises them daily decisions on whether to attend events that curiosity will help them become often need to meet the measure of whether “destined” for the C-Suite, it gets attention.
For my part, I focus on the “why” and apply an evolutionary perspective to propose that we (humans) are instinctively or naturally inclined to be curious -- and that various environmental factors are responsible for blinkering or dampening levels of curiosity that are otherwise evolved.
Understanding the evolutionary basis, though, staple component that invite students – and for curiosity as a human universal importantly all of us – to think more about what we know invites everyone to appreciate that they can and what we should prioritize for future individually start being more curious, more investigations. innovative, or more entrepreneurial. In this view of life, then, when curiosity On a practical class-to-class level, instructors isn’t only expected from hipsters, hippies, can incorporate this approach to knowledge or members of any other subculture, both by leaving textbooks on the side and classrooms – and the enterprises that are working with original research articles where eventually informed by Business Schools – “limitations and future directions” are a have great potential for broad advancement.
References
1. Nicholson, N. (2008). Evolutionary psychology, organizational culture, and the family firm. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 22, 73-84. 2. Kniffin, K. M., et al. (2017). The Sound of Cooperation: Musical influences on cooperative behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 38, 372-390. 3. Kniffin, K. M., et al. (2015). Eating Together at the Firehouse: How Workplace Commensality Relates to the Performance of Firefighters. Human Performance, 28, 281-306. 4. Kniffin, K. M., et al. (2014). Beauty is in the In-Group of the Beholded: Intergroup differences in the perceived attractiveness of leaders. The Leadership Quarterly, 25, 1143-1153. 5. Kniffin, K. M., and Wilson, D. S. (2010). Evolutionary Perspectives on Workplace Gossip: How and Why Gossip Can Be Good. Group & Organization Management, 35, 150-176. 6. Kniffin, K. M. (2009). Evolutionary Perspectives on Salary Dispersion within Firms. Journal of Bioeconomics, 11, 23-42.
evolution-institute.org How Evolutionary Thinking Can Transform the Workplace 17
The face of a leader: Honest signal or a mismatch? by John Antonakis
Why do faces play such a prominent role however, there is nothing in one’s face that in interactions and decision-making? In signals competence. CEO remuneration Macbeth, King Duncan reflects on how and their perceived competence are he had completely trusted the Thane strongly correlated; however, perceived of Cawdor who he then had sent to the competence plays no causal role in firm gallows for treason; the King lamented performance. Judgments of intelligence do that “There’s no art to find the mind’s not correlate will with actual intelligence. construction in the face.” Worse, individuals pay inordinate attention to the face (e.g., its trustworthiness) even The insights of Shakespeare confirm what when objective performance history (e.g., science knows today—it is hard to judge whether the person has been altruistic character from the face. Why then did or selfish in the past) is available. Also, evolution select us to have this capacity, perceivers appear rather sure about insofar as evaluating faces, and here I am their assessments of others based on talking about individuals who do not have appearances; and that there is agreement any obvious genetic defects? We know that across perceivers gives them reason to children can predict who will win a high- believe that one is able “judge the book by stakes election race merely on the basis its cover.” Why would evolution appear to of facial appearance of the candidates— program us with the wrong scripts?
When encountering a person we do not look at their feet, torso, or shoulders; we are compelled to first look at them in the face and instantly judge them.
Although we would expect that evolution Perhaps it was useful for sexual selection selected certain features indicating some in our ancestral times, where symmetry underlying trait or quality that can be reliable or attractiveness was important for detected by perceivers, it appears that our signalling fitness. Or perhaps as we started face-processing template–which is invoked transitioning to large-scale societies it was from birth—was developed for other reasons. important to quickly gauge the intentions
evolution-institute.org How Evolutionary Thinking Can Transform the Workplace 18 of strangers from their features or emotions. impressions if we are to evaluate others Whatever the case, it seems that our genes accurately. have not played catch-up with the current cultural and technological milieu. In the past, evaluators used insights from the now discredited insights of physiognomy; This mismatch is rather dysfunctional, yet, today, selectors still unreflectively rely whether it concerns voters, personnel on looks do not understand how their selectors, or board of directors. Yet, it is judgments can be biased because of the because of science that we know what facial appearance of a target. More attention governs processing of configuration of must be paid to insights gleaned from the facial features, the rules used to infer evolutionary and psychological sciences to perceived qualities, and perceiver reactions ensure we take decisions rationally and in to various features; we know too that there an informed manner. Not only is it ethical to are dedicated brain regions that appear to do so; it will also more economical because process face signals. Thus, we know that the most apt—and not the most apt looking— we must supplement and overrule our first will be chosen.
Further reading:
1. Antonakis, J. & Dalgas, O. (2009). Predicting Elections: Child’s Play! Science, 323(5918): 1183. 2. Antonakis, J. & Eubanks, D. L. (2017). Looking leadership in the face. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26(3): 270-275. 3. Todorov, A. (2017). Face Value: The Irresistible Influence of First Impressions. Princeton University Press. 4. Todorov, A., Olivola, C. Y., Dotsch, R., & Mende-Siedlecki, P. (2015). Social Attributions from Faces: Determinants, Consequences, Accuracy, and Functional Significance. Annual Review of Psychology, 66: 519-545. 5. Van Vugt, M. (2017). Evolutionary, Biological, and Neuroscience Perspectives. In J. Antonakis & D. V. Day (Eds.), The Nature of Leadership, 3nd ed. Thousand, Oaks: Sage.
evolution-institute.org How Evolutionary Thinking Can Transform the Workplace 19
Building trust in diverse groups by Paulo Finuras
In my view, the greatest insight an evolutionary support our choice of leaders suffer from perspective offers to business professionals biases inherited from our evolutionary is the ability to connect leadership, trust and past, which are frequently mismatched diversity management together. with our current environments that change faster than our brains. Lastly, we know that We know that the evolutionary origin of trust trust within a group or an organization between people relays in similarity because is a critical economic and social asset, this creates attraction, and this attraction and when nurtured, lowers the need for creates emotional comfort. control and internal transaction costs, thus increasing the responsiveness, agility and We also know that, with the acceleration competitiveness. of globalization, it is necessary to lead and manage a diversity of people, generations, Therefore, in my view, the greatest insight values, ways of thinking and working, an evolutionary perspective can offer among other things, and that diversity is a to business professionals is the ability to source of wealth, innovation and creativity, connect leadership, trust and diversity as it allows different perspectives and management with teaching students and responses to complex problems. business professionals about our long evolutionary path and the biological We also know that the mental models that economics of nature.
evolution-institute.org How Evolutionary Thinking Can Transform the Workplace 20
The main issues are: adaptive past and usual bias responses?
• How can we, today, respond properly in • How can we face the new organizational an environment that changes faster than and business pressures that require new our brains in the field of management and leadership skills and profiles— and what skills business, without being betrayed by our and profiles are those?
Mental models that support our choice of leaders suffer from biases inherited from our evolutionary past, which are frequently mismatched with our current environments that change faster than our brains.
• How can we defeat the leadership myth • How can leaders manage to build similarity that leaders are always necessary, and within diverse teams and organizations? leadership action must be centered on the figure of one person only, when today we I strongly believe that any system that need dispersed leadership skills among knows itself and the environment in which different talents and capacities within a it operates has more possibilities to survive, group? adapt and be effective, since it better controls its destiny. • What can our evolutionary past teach us about creating trust and similarity among diverse groups?
References
Finuras, P. (2013). O dilema da confiança. Lisboa: Ed. Sílabo Finuras, P. (2015). Primatas Culturais – Evolução e Natureza humana. Lisboa: Ed. Sílabo Finuras, P. (2015). Why are there so many different languages in the world? Could Historical Pathogen Prevalence Predicts Human Language Diversity? The Group Immunity Hypothesis. [link] Nicholson, N. (2000). Managing the human animal. New York: Thomson. Nicholson, N., Spisak, B. & M. Van Vugt. (2011). Leadership in Organizations: An Evolutionary Perspective. In Evolutionary Psychology in the Business Sciences. Language Diversity? The group Immunity Hypothesis. Van Vugt, M., Van Lange, P., Balliet, D. (2015). Social Dilemmas: The psychology of human cooperation. London: Oxford University Press. Van Vugt, Mark & Grabo, Allen E. (2015). “The Many Faces of Leadership: An Evolutionary-Psychology Approach,” Current Directions in Psychological Science, Vol. 24(6): 484-489.
evolution-institute.org How Evolutionary Thinking Can Transform the Workplace 21
The Evolved Decision Maker by Max Beilby
When it comes to realm of decision equivalent gains—a tendency known as ‘loss making, the classical view is that we aversion’3. Other psychological quirks weren’t humans are eminently rational1. According given such neutral terms, and are instead to neoclassical economists, we are utility commonly referred to as ‘biases’. Following maximizing agents, with stable preferences from this cognitive revolution, the field of that are not influenced by context2. behavioural economics was born.
To say that economic theory has impacted Soul searching in the wake of the 2007 Financial management practice is quite the Crisis led businesses and governments to take understatement. Frederick Taylor’s scientific behavioural economics as a discipline seriously4. management was largely a manifestation Undoubtedly, behavioural economists have of neoclassical economic theory, which helped improve our understanding of human helped spur the industrial revolution of the decision-making. However, by assuming people 20th century. To this day, Taylorism and are essentially irrational and subsequently its emphasis on rationality and efficiency producing an endless list of cognitive biases, pervade the business world. behavioural economists have arguably missed the forest for the trees5. Needless to say, homo-economicus is a mythical creature. Cognitive scientists such What behavioural economists neglected to as Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky answer is the ultimate question: why do people demonstrated empirically that people possess these psychological dispositions? frequently violate the axioms of rational choice Answering ultimate questions leads one to theory2. For example, people are on average evolution, as the human brain has been honed twice as sensitive to losses than they are to by the forces of natural selection.
What behavioural economists neglected to answer is the ultimate question: why do people possess these psychological dispositions? Answering ultimate questions leads one to evolution, as the human brain has been honed by the forces of natural selection.
Evolution makes one appreciate the adaptive recurrent problems in our distant ancestral past, nature of our psychological make-up6. An which are now frequently misaligned with the oversimplification of evolutionary psychology is demands of the modern world. that these ‘adaptive biases’ helped us solve
evolution-institute.org How Evolutionary Thinking Can Transform the Workplace 22
In a prehistoric world dominated by scarcity, became more sensitive to gains (whereas avoiding losses may have been evolutionary women on average did not)9. advantageous. Living as a hunter-gatherer, it would have been sensible to place greater Consider rogue trading as a case in point. value on preventing losses rather than on Seen through the conventional lens, rogue obtaining gains, as a reduction of resources trading is merely irrational behaviour. From an may well have resulted in death. In support of evolutionary perspective however, doubling the evolutionary explanation, other primate down on losses makes sense. Even at bad species such as Capuchin monkeys also odds, risk taking can pay handsomely for males demonstrate an aversion to losses7. due to sexual selection– as a few survivors will go on be more reproductively successful [10]. It What is so powerful about evolution is probably isn’t a coincidence that virtually all its theoretical parsimony. Evolutionary rogue traders are young men. psychology helps reconcile a bewildering array of psychological theories, and provides Loss aversion (or lack thereof) helps greater predictive power than conventional explain various aspects of organisational psychology8. For example, evolutionary behaviour. However, the ‘adaptive toolbox’ of theorising led to the discovery that loss evolutionary psychology offers a vast array of aversion is domain specific, being amplified or such instruments11. Evolutionary psychology suppressed in different environments. Yexin not only provides us richer models of human Jessica Li and her colleagues demonstrated decision-making. A deeper understanding experimentally that activating ‘mating motives’ of human nature can help us create more in men erases their aversion to losses. When effective organizations, and help us address considering romantic interest, men on average real-world problems12.
References 1. Kenrick, D. T., & Griskevicius, V. (2013). The Rational Animal: How evolution made us smarter than we think. Basic Books. 2. Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow. Allen Lane 3. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1991). Loss aversion in riskless choice: A reference-dependent model. The quarterly journal of economics, 106(4), 1039-1061. 4. Akerlof, G. A., & Shiller, R. J. (2010). Animal spirits: How human psychology drives the economy, and why it matters for global capitalism. Princeton University Press. 5. Collins, J. (2015) Please, not another bias! An evolutionary take on behavioural economics. Evonomics. 6. Haselton, Martie G.; Nettle, Daniel; Andrews, Paul W. (2005). “The Evolution of Cognitive Bias” . In Buss, D.M. The Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology. Hoboken: Wiley. pp. 724–746. 7. Haselton, Martie G.; Nettle, Daniel; 7. Chen, M. K., Lakshminarayanan, V., & Santos, L. R. (2006). How basic are behavioral biases? Evidence from capuchin monkey trading behavior. Journal of Political Economy, 114(3), 517-537.8. 9. Li, Y. J., Kenrick, D. T., 8. Van Vugt, M. & Ahuja, A. (2010) Selected: Why some people lead, why others follow, and why it matters. Profile Books 9. Li, Y. J., Kenrick, D. T., Griskevicius, V., & Neuberg, S. L. (2012). Economic decision biases and fundamental motivations: how mating and self-protection alter loss aversion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(3), 550. 10. Gapper, J. (2011) What makes a rogue trader? Financial Times. 11. DeScioli, P., Kurzban, R., & Todd, P. M. (2015) Evolved Decision Makers in Organizations. In S.M. Colarelli & R.D. Arvey (Eds) The Biological Foundations of Organizational Behavior. University of Chicago Press 12. Nicholson, N. (2000) Managing the Human Animal. Thomson-Texere
evolution-institute.org How Evolutionary Thinking Can Transform the Workplace 23
Design organizations compatible with human nature by Stephen Colarelli
Humans evolved over the past 1.2 million mechanisms – the environment we live years, and for 99.9 percent of this time we in now is dramatically different. Yet from lived as hunter-gatherers in small bands the advent of the industrial revolution to composed of kith and kin. During this the present, the business class paid scant period (the Pleistocene) we developed attention to human nature. The social and a suite of evolved psychological and physical design of organizations focused physical mechanisms that were adaptive on efficiency and cost-savings. This in this context1. For example, people resulted in a mismatch between our work who were predisposed to cooperate with environments and human nature2. group members, mate with members of the opposite sex who evidenced signs of Therefore, one of the greatest insights fertility, and were attentive and caring an evolutionary perspective offers to towards offspring—these people were business is this: design the physical and most likely to survive and reproduce. social characteristics of organizations so Although our psychology and physiology that they are compatible with our evolved remains primarily adapted to life as human nature. Understanding this insight hunter-gatherers – we still possess will help to create organizations that most of that same suite of psychological people enjoy working at, where they work
evolution-institute.org How Evolutionary Thinking Can Transform the Workplace 24 hard to make them succeed, and where as Dunbar’s number. If a business unit people are motivated to do their best. exceeds 150 people, firms should cleave There are many ways to do this. Here are the old unit and start a new one. three examples. Increase face-to-face interaction. Keep business units small. We are a social species that evolved in an Humans evolved in social units no larger environment where communication was than 150 people—and for good reason. face-to-face. As a result, we developed a We can only remember the names, faces, suite of finely tuned verbal and non-verbal and our interaction history of about 150 communication mechanisms. We can get a people. Research by Robin Dunbar has good read on another person’s emotional found that this is a robust limit. Modern state, intentions, trustworthiness, and hunter-gather groups consist of about personality within a few minutes of 150 people, the average total number of interaction. We did not evolve in front of Christmas cards a household sends out computer screens. Therefore, we are better is around 150, and military companies able to solve problems, exchange nuanced (from the Romans to the present) information, and develop trust through consist of about 150 soldiers3. Effective face-to-face interaction. Better business communication, coordination, trust and results are likely when there is high-quality cohesion breaks down once the social unit interaction among employees and between exceeds 150, what has become known employees and customers.
From the advent of the industrial revolution to the present, the business class paid scant attention to human nature. The social and physical design of organizations focused on efficiency and cost-savings. This resulted in a mismatch between our work environments and human nature.
Encourage cooperation. cognitive and language capabilities, has enabled us to create large organizations In The Social Conquest of Earth, E. and societies that have spanned the O. Wilson’s argues that humans have globe4. Too often, though, business become the dominant species on the structures encourage internal conflict earth primarily because of our ability (e.g., between management and labor) to cooperate. We are both a social and hyper-competitiveness (among species and a species where members people and firms), which go far beyond can cooperate and help people who the sweet spot of a reasonable mix of are not kin. This, combined with our cooperation and competition. Some good
evolution-institute.org How Evolutionary Thinking Can Transform the Workplace 25 places to start include linking rewards to successful adaptation means continuous cooperative behavior and reducing the adaptation. But you already know this absurd array of corporate status symbols and know that this is extremely difficult. and pay distinctions. What you may not know is that most Designing organizations so that they organizations (and most species) do are compatible with human nature is not adapt and eventually go extinct5. important because of the fundamental Therefore, when the physical and social insight that an evolutionary perspective design of organizations is well-matched to can offer business: adapt to changes our evolved human nature, you improve the in the environment or die. Because the organization’s capabilities for adapting and environment is continually changing, lower its chances of premature extinction.
References
1. Tooby, J. & Cosmides, L. (1992). The psychological foundations of culture. In J. Barkow, L. Cosmides, & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture. New York: Oxford University Press. 2. An, M., Colarelli, S. M., O’Brien, K., & Boyajian M. E. (2016). Why we need more nature at work: Effects of sunlight exposure and natural elements on employee well-being. PLOS ONE, 11, e0155614. 3. Dunbar, R. I. (1997). Grooming, gossip and the evolution of language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. For a very readable review of studies related to Dunbar’s number, see: Konnikova, M. (Oct. 7, 2014). The limits of friendship. The New Yorker. 4. Wilson. E. O. (2012). The social conquest of earth. New York: Norton. 5. Alroy, J. (2008). Dynamics of origination and extinction in the marine fossil record. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105 (Supplement 1), 11536–11542. Freeman, J., Carroll, G. R., & Hannan, M. T. (1983). The liability of newness: Age dependence in organizational death rates. American sociological review, 48, 692-710 Perry, M. J. (Oct 12, 2015). Fortune 500 firms in 1955 v. 2015: Only 12% remain, thanks to the creative destruction that fuels economic prosperity. AEIdeas: A public policy Blog from AEI. Foundations of Organizational Behavior, 203.
evolution-institute.org How Evolutionary Thinking Can Transform the Workplace 26
The Gendered Organisation by Nigel Nicholson
Men and women differ physically and may reveal themselves in what evolutionists mentally. Whether these differences matter call “niche construction”: agentically created or even are visible depends entirely upon social arrangement that are conducive to their circumstances. For example, some sports capabilities and preferences. require gender segregation at the high levels (football; swimming); others do not (bridge, This can be seen in the pre-teen school horse riding) according to whether the faculties yard, where boys and girls typically self- aroused by the sport confer a gendered segregate to a high degree and play types of competitive advantage (almost always men games that reflect evolved sex-typed stable over women). Yet, many situations, including strategies. Boys are often preoccupied with many work roles, are gender neutral, and action games where they can test, compare even when they do suit the capabilities of and enhance their competitive advantage one sex over the other, you can see many in physical and imaginative games. Girls crossovers: women doing “men’s” work (e.g. are often more absorbed with complex on building sites in India), and men doing routines that shape and reshape cooperative women’s work (e.g. nursing in hospitals). This alliances, and group inclusion and exclusion. is because a) men and women differ in degree Conversely, it is also known that social rather than categorically in their attributes, structures shape relationships. Studies with and b) because we are highly adaptable, and monkey colonies find that central resource structural and cultural norms and incentives provisioning promotes competitive inter- control behavior. Thus one might expect, free member relations, while dispersed supply from such pressures, men and women might fosters a more cooperative order. An exhibit different preferences. When free to experiment with student subjects successfully organize how they wish, sex-typed preferences replicated this relationship.
The classic pyramidal hierarchy, so beloved by men, is increasingly unfit for purpose.
Taking approximations of these two models authority based system (the agrarian/industrial for organizing – a) the flat, decentralized, team- dominance hierarchy), a Darwinian view of based model (the operating model of hunter- sex differences leads us to expect gender gatherer groups), vs. b) the linear, status and differences in preferences for these forms. This
evolution-institute.org How Evolutionary Thinking Can Transform the Workplace 27 has been strongly confirmed by my own But in the digital age the world of work research. Women strongly prefer type a) and is changing, and the classic pyramidal men type b) as destinations for starting a hierarchy, so beloved by men, is increasingly career, leading, and preferences for a same unfit for purpose. Many newer companies sex leader in each. Organizational designs much more resemble hunter-gatherer are thus highly gendered. In lay terms, linear social structures in their fluid and pragmatic hierarchies allow men to play the games functionality. But what if men won’t let go they like best – league table status-aspiring of male dominance hierarchy because they tournaments; while flat structures, strongly like it, especially its senior caretakers, people preferred by women, give more scope who have most benefitted from its payoffs? for the logic of inclusion and exclusion; This has far-reaching implications, not least replicating what is visible in many a junior for the so-called glass ceiling, which persists school gender playground: a voluntary largely because many women feel alienated segregation where the boys mostly engage by the model. They don’t want to play the in win-lose games while the girls form tournament game in dominance hierarchies elaborate membership circles. because they don’t like it and don’t play it with such practiced ease as the men who outnumber them.
evolution-institute.org How Evolutionary Thinking Can Transform the Workplace 28
The Business World Needs Multilevel Selection (MLS) Theory by David Sloan Wilson
What are the roles of competition and to business corporations. It is based on the cooperation for a successful business or following principles, which are so elementary economy? Current opinions in the business that they are unlikely to be wrong. world are a mass of contradictions. According to the metaphor of the invisible hand, the 1) Evolution is based on relative fitness. pursuit of self-interest robustly benefits the It doesn’t matter how well one survives common good. Competition among firms is and reproduces in absolute terms; only in supposed to result in “creative destruction”, comparison to others in the vicinity. As the allowing the best to triumph over the worst. economist Robert Frank puts it in his book The Yet, a business retreat is very likely to feature Darwin Economy: Liberty, Competition, and trust-building exercises and reminders that the Common Good, life is graded on a curve. there is no “I” in TEAM. 2) The social behaviors that maximize relative Multilevel Selection (MLS) Theory can create fitness within a group tend to undermine the order out of this chaos. It was developed for the welfare of the group. This is the opposite of the study of social behaviors in non-human species metaphor of the invisible hand. but it is equally relevant to the cultural design of human groups, including but not restricted 3) Social behaviors that are “for the good of
evolution-institute.org How Evolutionary Thinking Can Transform the Workplace 29 the group” might be selectively into bankruptcy. This is the maximization of disadvantageous within the group, but they relative fitness within the group. Now can be highly advantageous in between- imagine a Monopoly tournament with group competition. multiple teams. The trophy goes to the team that collectively develops its properties the As a quick way to understand the logic of fastest. This is the maximization of group MLS theory, imagine playing the game of fitness in a multi-group population. Nearly Monopoly, where the goal is to own all the every decision that you make as a team real estate and drive every other player player in a tournament would be different
MLS theory makes it crystal clear that unless competition is appropriately structured and refereed, it can do a lot more harm than good.
than as an individual trying to beat your what’s good for the corporation being bad for opponents in the regular game of Monopoly. the global economy and environment. MLS theory makes it crystal clear that unless competition is appropriately structured and The idea that competition among firms results refereed, it can do a lot more harm than good. in the best replacing the worst would be called To make matters more complex, the logic of “naïve group selection” by an evolutionary MLS theory applies to all levels of a multi-tier biologist—as if selection operates only at the hierarchy, including the tiers of a single level of firms. Evolutionary biologists went hierarchically organized corporation. What’s beyond naïve group selection decades ago and good for a single employee can be bad for her their progress can be a tremendous source of unit. What’s good for her unit can be bad for insight to the business world. other units, and so on, all the way up to
For more about MLS theory:
Wilson, D. S. (2015). Does Altruism Exist? Culture, Genes, and the Welfare of Others. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Wilson, D. S., Kelly, T. F., Philip, M. M., & Chen, X. (2015). Doing Well By Doing Good: An Evolution Institute Report on Socially Responsible Businesses. [link]
Wilson, D. S., Van Vugt, M., & O’Gorman, R. (2008). Multilevel Selection Theory and Major Evolutionary Transitions: Implications for Psychological Science. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17(1), 6–9.
evolution-institute.org How Evolutionary Thinking Can Transform the Workplace 30
The Joy of X by Rory Sutherland
Alphabet, the holding company order of magnitude. A “moonshot” is for Google, contains a division called hence defined as a 10x achievement, X (founded as Google X) charged where it becomes possible for something with devising what the company calls to be, at a stroke, ten times faster, ten times “moonshots”. Headed by Astro Teller, longer, ten times bigger or performed ten grandson of Edward, X eschews the times more efficiently. In the case of the usual business of making incremental driverless car, the aim is to reduce by 90% improvements to focus instead on those or more the number of human fatalities on rare but life-changing inventions the world’s roads, thus making them ten which improve something by an times safer.
As a marketer, I obviously value any opportunity better to understand ourselves and our true, evolved social nature. It is potentially a huge source of competitive advantage and differentiation.
And I wish them luck. They certainly have So the 10x objective improvement, the money and the talent. And in many on which Google as an engineering ways they are right to focus on what entity is fixated, will become harder they do. Most of the real advancements and harder. made in human history so far have come about through things which are ten times But what about 10x subjective better than what preceded them. Steam improvement? engines were 10xWatermills. Trains were 10xCanals. Cars were 10xHorses. The Jet What would happen if we could Aircraft was 10xTrain. The electric light was understand people ten times better? 10xGaslight. The Internet was 10xPrint. But it won’t be all that easy. In many of I believe that insights from evolutionary these areas, we are bumping up against the psychology and social psychology present laws of physics and economics: it is unlikely us with an enormous number of possible in the medium term that 6,000mph mass air Xs. In fact, I think progress in psychology travel will be either feasible or affordable, will be a greater source of Xs in the next 50 say. In many areas of engineering we are years than progress in technology. running out of road. (Passenger air travel today is slower than in the late 1970s). And finding those Xs will be inordinately easier
evolution-institute.org How Evolutionary Thinking Can Transform the Workplace 31 for us than for Dr Teller. Cheaper, too. And just feel cheated by the company which sold perhaps no-one need get killed in the attempt. you a ticket on the implicit promise of a seat? There is a simple reason for this. Present day psychology leaves much more room for I don’t know the answer. But it is certainly improvement than present-day engineering. worth a fortune if we could find out the truth. And it would cost very little. As with any scientific revolution, there is a very simple starting point for our psychological As a marketer, I obviously value any revolution: find out what everyone else is wrong opportunity better to understand ourselves about, then work from there. In our case, and our true, evolved social nature. It is whether in policy-making or business, that potentially a huge source of competitive simply means asking what psychological advantage and differentiation. assumptions underlie a decision and asking two questions: 1) are those assumptions right The trick is to find things which are or wrong and 2) what could we do differently objectively similar and subjectively if they are indeed wrong. Evolutionary different. Or vice versa. psychology provides us with a wonderful new bullshit-detector for understanding the At a very trivial level, let’s take the Uber human feelings and emotional map. This does not make the wait for a taxi motivations which lie behind the cloak of reason. 10x shorter, but it does make it 10x less irritating. This comes from a very simple And there are many, many cases where our psychological insight that we have a assumptions are wrong. For instance, it is a sad peculiar evolved hatred of uncertainty (Tali fact of business and political life that no-one Sharot’s new book The Influential Mind has will ever get fired for acting as though a wonderful chapter on this.) economic theory is true. But economics, by attempting to reduce human motivation to But let’s take this further. Can we make a single dimension, is not only wrong, but a hotel-stay 10x more enjoyable? Can we immensely creatively limiting in the solutions it make travelling slowly 10x more enjoyable demands. Every solution boils down to bribing than travelling fast? Can we make the tax people or fining them. But if our minds are not code feel 10x fairer? Can we make working monolithic, any attempts to appeal to a single feel 10x more rewarding? Can we make motivation are fundamentally wrong - and, recycling a pleasure not a chore? Can we even when not wrong, imaginatively barren. create 10xCooperation in a community? Could better psychology make war Yesterday, I found myself debating a 10xRarer? seemingly ridiculous question. Why do people hate being made to stand on trains? Here’s your man Charles: Is it because it is tiring? Humiliating? Is the “made” more frustrating than the “stand” - I “In the distant future, I see open fields for have often seen people choosing to stand far more important researches. Psychology when seats are empty? Is it mentally tiring will be based on a new foundation, that of keeping your balance? Or is it the banal the necessary acquirement of each mental explanation that your legs get tired? Or do you power and capacity by gradation..”
evolution-institute.org How Evolutionary Thinking Can Transform the Workplace 32
This View of Life is the online magazine of the non-profit think tank The Evolution Institute, which applies evolutionary science to pressing social issues, deploying a multi-disciplinary team of experts in biology, the social sciences, and Big Data. Projects of study include the Norway Initiative on global quality of life, the Urban Initiative on sustainable community and educational development, and Sheshat, a large, multidisciplinary database of past societies, used to test theories about political and economic development.
Consider joining the TVOL1000, a group that supports the magazine, helps to shape its content, and otherwise works to establish “this view of life” as a worldview for accomplishing positive change.
www.evolution-institute.org TheEvolutionInstitute @evoinstitute
10627 Machrihanish Circle San Antonio, FL 33576 (813) 435-3534
evolution-institute.org