Re: Week 2 Question 2 - Entropy and Equifinality

In Harris and Sherbolm’s text, entropy means disorganization, stagnation, and chaos. The authors claim, “An overdependence on control or too many limits on new ideas through negative feedback leads to stagnation and entropy” (Harris/Sherbolm 34). Harris and Sherbolm clearly explain based on the small group communication, if members increase lots of their own ideas that reflect disorganization, not focusing as well as chaos. Additionally, if members cannot energize to increase any new ideas in the small group communication that result of stagnation. In order to avoid any disorganization, stagnation, and chaos happening in small group, the members should be responsible to conduct and control their behaviors in the meeting. Under such conditions, the negative feedback will be more helpful to awaken the members and bring them back to the right track for discussion.
Equifinality means that the small group members can take different ways to reach their target. Harris and Sherbolm say, “Equifinality refers to the fact that living systems can take different routes to the same destination” (Harris/Sherbolm 34). The authors reveal that different ideas coming from the members can lead to the same destination. In Harris and Sherbolm’s explanation, we understand every member in a small group may have their own ideas because of humanity. Sometimes, the different ideas may create the best and fast ways to reach the goal. Under this issue, the group members should not be subjective to reject or neglect someone’s idea in the meeting.
Generally, we always face the entropy and equifinality working for the class projects. If the members can monitor how to control their behaviors, be more perspective and more objective to accept someone’s idea in the meeting, then the best result will come out at the end.