As a constructive disruptor, I break rules, and patterns. But over and over I have encountered patterns that just can’t seem to be broken. This got me thinking about ‘rules’ vs ‘laws’.

I define a law as something immutable, an unchangeable fact. The law of gravity, the speed of light.

A rule is a human construct. Something that we all might agree upon (and may be a fact) but it can be challenged, broken and changed. (Speed limit, our human legal laws)

Ultimately you can break a rule, but you will be broken upon a law.

It is important to understand what are rules and what are laws when you are dealing with disruption, change, creating the new etc.

One of the magical things about the mindset of the novice, is that their lens is not colored by preexisting ‘rules’. They take more risks, find new paths, and reinvent often when the more experienced will fail. From the novice mindset, they don’t see the barriers that are so solid for the rest of us. These rules to us look like laws.

Growth pattern of companies seem consistent, From 0–50, the core founders are the fuel, 50–300 the team, 300–1000 the culture, 1000+ process. Is this pattern a rule that can be disrupted, or is it a law?

Rule or Law? If you consider ahead, you’ll know how to disrupt it.

Original Linkedin Post: http://bit.ly/2VcjuT4