The systems I find most interesting are not rigid. They provide enough consistency to create trust, but enough flexibility for people to use judgment. They help knowledge survive when someone leaves. They make decisions easier to understand. They reduce repeated conversations about things that have already been decided. And they create a shared foundation without assuming every situation should have exactly the same answer. That matters because organisations are human systems. People need clarity, but they also need autonomy. They need direction, but also room to question it. They need accountability, but not unnecessary layers of permission. I think hierarchy can be useful when it supports those things — when it helps information move, decisions happen and people understand where responsibility sits. It becomes less useful when the structure itself creates distance from the work. This is probably why I keep returning to systems thinking across seemingly different areas — brand, customer experience, strategy, sustainability, leadership and organisational design. Underneath them, I am often interested in the same question: How can we design the conditions that allow people to do better work? Not by removing complexity entirely. But by making sure people are not carrying complexity the system could have carried for them. "Good systems are an act of care. They reduce the mental burden people have to carry so they can focus on the work that actually needs them."