Structural disequilibrium manifests itself not only in the form of new social classes and occupations but also in the places in which individuals work and the way in which organizations are linked together. If super salaries represent a negative disruption, the appearance of new organizational forms and collaborative competition, which we have already discussed in Chapter Four, is a further positive sign of societal adaptation. Perhaps this is a prejudice of mine, but I would argue that how organizations and their environmental contexts— or what economists refer to as markets— transform over time remains the most critical component of any social evolutionary model because organizations are where the work of society is accomplished. Yet, this aspect of societal evolution remains largely absent in most discussions of evolution of the mind and of society as a whole (Giddens 1990; Habermas 1979; Nolan and Lenski 2015; Parsons 1966). Conversely, while several evolutionary organizational theories have been proposed recently (Laloux 2014; Miles et al. 1997), they all suffer from the same defects as their counterparts at the macro level: they expect a trajectory that moves always onward and upward without distinguishing stages of societal development or specific objectives, to say nothing about either micro or macro levels. Beyond this, one major evolutionary theory in organization science built upon Campbell's (Aldrich and Ruef 2006; Baum and McKelvey 1999) distinctions of variation, selection, and retention does not predict which varieties will be selected. Most of these perspectives spend little time identifying driving forces. Also, the evolution of markets or competitive contexts remains almost completely absent from discussions of organizational evolution. The sociology of markets has largely ignored evolution, focusing instead on stable arrangements such as networks, institutions, and performances (Fligstein and Dauter 2007). Any evolutionary theory of organizations must include a companion piece about contextual transformation emphasizing how certain performances become more important over time, for example, innovation replaces efficiency/ productivity as a selective mechanism for specific forms of variety, to say nothing about the changing values of consumers.

Furthermore, the definition of both organizations and their contexts must develop an expanded perspective that moves beyond the economist's narrow focus on product markets to include public services and the outputs of research organizations.