I was taking a walk recently was taken aback while looking at some spruce trees in the park. Why do spruce trees, and shade trees in general, grow needles and leaves on all sides even though it would be able to do more of its job if it concentrated its growth facing south side so it can get more sun?
Think about that for a second. Could this phenomena be translated to development and growth at a corporate level? A team level? A personal life journey level?
A spruce tree, or almost any standalone shade tree (not one that's bundled with a number of other trees) appears to have a symmetry to it. The length of limbs is generally equal around the trunk and the number of leaf/needle bunches is roughly the same.
There are even needles and leaves deeper in the branches with even less access to light.
I've read about the scientific reasons for this process, but I don't see the reasoning behind it. Why would energy be spent on growing a part of a tree that will obtain substantially less light and growth opportunity than other parts of the tree? Such a structure brings less photosynthesis and generates less energy/oxygen. The photo here is taken at high noon and shows how much of the spruce doesn't get light.
Aren't we all taught to put the most of our finite amount of effort and resources towards the areas that will have the greatest impact, the most growth. We work on things that will make us the most money. Standard capitalism theory, right?
Nature doesn't seem to work the same way.
We see when evergreen trees are clumped together that overlapping areas are without needles and don't really grow. So, there's some sort of criteria Nature uses to determine when exertion of resources in a low growth situation is not viable. Nature has some sort of logic; it's not an idiot.
So, why do standalone shade trees and evergreens grow symmetrically.
Does Nature look to develop balance? Are there inherent benefits to having some level of diversification around a core? Is there inherent benefit to this setup when clouds are prominent? Do the areas of less light perform different functions that support the overall mission?
I think a key takeaway is that a singular focus and drive towards the main area for growth is not desirable. It leads to imbalance.
Again, how could this phenomena be translated to a corporate level? A team level? A personal life journey level? Broad portfolio vs. tight focus. Broader knowledge base vs. specific leaning. Long term look vs. constantly pursuing immediate growth.
How could this affect the way you manage your teams and your life?