Editing Heterarchy (section)

==Sociology and political theory==
[[Anthropologist]] [[Dmitri Bondarenko]] follows Carole Crumley in her definition of heterarchy as "the relation of elements to one another when they are unranked or when they possess the potential for being ranked in a number of different ways" and argues that it is therefore not strictly the opposite of hierarchy, but is rather the opposite of '''[[homoarchy]]''',<ref>Bondarenko (2005), [https://www.sociostudies.org/journal/files/seh/2005_2/homoarchic_alternative_to_the_homoarchic_state.pdf "A homoarchic alternative to the homoarchic state"], page 18 - "The opposite of heterarchy, then, would be a condition in a society in which relationships in most contexts are ordered mainly according to one principal hierarchical relationship. This organizational principle may be called 'homoarchy'."</ref> itself definable as "the relation of elements to one another when they possess the potential for being ranked in one way only".<ref>Bondarenko, Grinin, Korotayev (2002), ""Alternative pathways of social evolution", p. 55.</ref>

[[David C. Stark]] (1950- ) has been contributing to developing the concept of heterarchy in the [[sociology of organizations]].

Political [[hierarchy| hierarchies]] and heterarchies are systems in which multiple dynamic power-structures govern the actions of the system.  They represent different types of [[network (mathematics)|network]] structures that allow differing degrees of connectivity. In a ([[Tree structure|tree-structured]]) [[hierarchy]] every [[node (networking)|node]] is connected to at most one [[parent node]] and to zero or more [[child node]]s. In a heterarchy, however, a node can be connected to any of its surrounding nodes without needing to go through or to get permission from some other node.

Socially, a heterarchy distributes [[Social privilege| privilege]] and decision-making among participants, while a hierarchy assigns more power and privilege to the members "high" in the structure. In a systemic perspective, Gilbert Probst, Jean-Yves Mercier and others describe heterarchy as the flexibility of the formal relationships inside an organization.<ref>Probst, Mercier, et al. (1992), ''Organisation et management'' {{Page needed|date=September 2010}}.</ref> Domination and subordination links can be reversed and privileges can be redistributed in each situation, following the needs of the system.<ref>{{cite journal|last1= White|first1= Joyce |editor1-last= Ehrenreich|editor1-first= Robert|title= Incorporating Heterarchy into Theory on Socio-Political Development: The case from Southeast Asia|journal=Heterarchy and the Analysis of Complex Societies|date= 1995 |pages= 101–123|series= Archeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association Number 6|display-editors= etal}}</ref>

Researchers have also framed higher-education staff as operating in a heterarchical structure. Examining [[sex discrimination | sex-based discrimination]] in psychology, Schoenherr and Dopko<ref name=Schoenherr>{{cite journal|last1= Schoenherr|first1= Jordan|last2= Dopko|first2= Raelyne |title=Heterarchical social organizations and relational models: Understanding gender biases in psychological science|date= 2019|pages= 258–281|journal= Theory and Psychology|volume= 29|issue= 2|doi= 10.1177/0959354318825307|s2cid= 150893628}}</ref> identify discrepancies between the number of women awarded PhDs, the number of professorships held by women, and the number of scientific awards granted to women in the behavioral sciences and by the American Psychological Association. They argue that this data supports difference reward systems, representing heterarchies. They go on to connect the notion of heterarchy to contemporary models of relational structures in psychology (i.e., relational models theory). Schoenherr<ref>
{{cite journal|last1= Schoenherr|first1= Jordan|title= Moral Economies and Codes of Conduct: the Social Organization of Canadian Experimental Psychology|date= 2019|pages= 31–54|journal= Scientia Canadensis, 41|volume= 41|doi= 10.7202/1065958ar|s2cid= 212761522|doi-access= free}}</ref> has argued that this is also reflected in divisions within professional psychology, such as those between clinical psychologists and experimental psychologists. Using the history of professional psychology in Canada and the United States, he provides quotations from professional organization to illustrate the disparate identities and reward-systems. Rather than just reflecting a feature of psychological science, these{{which?|date=March 2023}} case studies were presented as evidence of heterarchies in academia and in social organizations more generally.