A brief description would be as follows: a viable system is a way to structure organizations, regardless of their field of action, in which communication and management are optimized. A viable system is based on the principle of recursion, meaning it can be applied and repeated indefinitely, and it is divided into five ‘subsystems,’ each of which is also a viable system in itself and fulfills a specific function:

• Implementation: At this level, we find the primary activities that the organization develops to generate its value chain. These are the divisions (A, B, and C) that have direct contact with the real world (Environment), and each has its own management (Divisional Administration).
• Coordination: This refers to the synchronization between primary tasks and the overall objectives of the system. It should be understood synergistically, as the goal is not a one-way coordination but constant feedback, making communication key.
• Control: This subsystem aims to regulate the internal behavior of the organization by ensuring compliance with policies, though it is not expected to be rigid and repetitive. It also seeks to audit and investigate the control subsystem itself (Subsystem 3*).
• Intelligence: This part of the scheme focuses on projecting the organization’s future and its relationship with the external world. It is crucial for the system’s ability to adapt to changes and remain viable over time.
• Policy: Finally, this subsystem is dedicated to the creation of policies that will govern the system. It is important to understand that this subsystem does not operate in isolation; rather, one of the advantages of the viable system is that, thanks to the connection and synergy between subsystems, policies emerge from the organization’s own needs.

Ecclesia and Viable Systems

As we can observe, viable systems may contain dependencies and functions that seem familiar, yet they propose crucial differences in how we understand organizations: the relationships between the subsystems of the organization are not exclusively hierarchical; feedback is also sought from bottom to top. Decisions are not made by an isolated entity or organ but are rather consequences of both internal and external circumstances and their analysis. It is not a static or sterile model, as it always considers its environment and even the future it faces. Finally, viable systems can be understood as a fractal rather than a pyramid: each subsystem is itself a viable system that must also regulate itself.

This is precisely what Ecclesia seeks: to ensure that organizations and societies are viable through decision-making based on assertive communication and democracy. Through our tools, we aim for everyone to participate in decision-making at various levels inclusively, considering all viewpoints, and building the best ideas together.

One of our features that faithfully demonstrates this is our system of Related Assemblies, which allows organizations and individuals to hold interconnected meetings that can be tracked and analyzed. This ensures that decisions are not made only within a specific group or level of the organization but are truly enriched deliberations through the participation of everyone. In this way, we address several issues in democratic decision-making, such as communication failures, lack of citizen participation, corruption, favoritism, and flaws in project planning and execution.

We want people to make their organizations and societies viable, and our approach is through the new Digital Democracy: Ecclesia.

References:

• Hoverstadt, Patrick. The Fractal Organization: Creating Sustainable Organizations with the Viable System Model
• On Cybernetics / Stafford Beer. Video made at the University of Manchester by Stafford Beer after the Chilean military coup in 1973
• Raúl Espejo and Antonia Gill. The Viable System Model as a Framework for Understanding Organizations
• Walker, Jon. Modelo de Sistema Viable como herramienta de diagnóstico y diseño