RM: “Collective control” as defined by you, Martin and Kent, depends on systems being in conflict over the state of the same controlled variable.
BN: That is not true.
RM: Yes, there is one and only one case where it is not true that “collective control” (as defined by you, Martin and Kent) depends on the members of the collective being in conflict. This is the case where each and every member of the collective has (for some unspecified reason) adopted the same reference specification for the state of the controlled variable. In this case the observed reference state of the controlled variable is not “virtual”; rather, it corresponds to the actual reference specification of each member of the collective. But in what I have read about “collective control” this situation is dealt with hardly all. Rather, the focus has been on how a stable virtual reference state of a controlled variable emerges when each and every member of a collective has a different reference for the state of that variable.
RM: So the main message I get from descriptions of “collective control” is that it refers to social stability, in the form of stable virtual reference states of collectively controlled variables, that emerges when each and every member of the collective controls the same variable with respect to different reference specifications. Of course, we could include the one non-conflict case by just saying: “collective control” refers to social stability in the form of stable reference states of collectively controlled variables that emerges when all members of the collective control the same variable. Even with that last definition, however, “collective control” is not a very useful description or model of most of the social controlling that we observe (See Chapter 7 in The Study of Living Control Systems)
Best, Rick