how to design living ecosystems

I define this as a bounded, physical space where entities disperse information and evolve the system with its interactions. Colloquially we call this asocial space — a co-located system where entities (people) are simultaneously exchanging public reactions and silent judgement.
I'm interested in a specific type of social space that is deliberately designed to illicit certain behaviors. Events are a good example of pre-configured social spaces.

Live experiences operate under different laws of attention.

In digital design, attention is a long and isolated game. Designing private experiences (most consumer apps) biases toward mechanics that drive habitual re-engagement and curiosity. The system measures a single user’s attention lifecycle over time. It evolves gradually, almost asymptotically, via continuous optimization. A designer debugs little-by-little until the system reaches a state of co-dependence for a single user, which is then multiplied across many.

Live experiences compress this lifecycle into a single, dense interval. Its state evolves at a much quicker velocity, possibly risking fragmentation if uncontrolled. It demands systematic orchestration to push/pull interactions in an autocatalytic way. You cannot wait for participants to tell you somethings wrong the day of the event to fix it since it likely has caused compounded problems that are hard to remedy.

The challenge of this is you're no longer analyzing how one node interacts with the rest of the system, but how other nodes respond in return. A well-designed ecosystem cannot be constantly monitored and spoon-fed micro-improvements until it gets better. Fed the correct inputs, it should be able to self-evolve. This is what makes texting friends on instagram fundamentally different from chatting at a live mixer. One isolates experience into a prolonged, private loop while the other lives in a volatile system that evolves by the second.

The goal is to design a system that is self-propagating. Once set in motion, it compounds through its own collisions. The speed of those collisions matters. Success is when every domino engages naturally, and the system sustains momentum without manual intervention.

step 1: define the grouping strategy

Inspired by Don Norman's Design for a Better World, here is my severely under-baked representation of the concept: there exist different nodes in an ecosystem that interact with each other. This can get very complex (groups on top of groups) or be very simple (single object-to-object interaction). Norman's thesis is that interactions within small groups have exponentially more impact on the entire system than object-to-object interactions.

Philosophically, encouraging group behavior inside your event design process can create a far more dynamic and interesting system than encouraging purely individualistic behavior.

step 2: define how these groups will interact

The core through-line of the ecosystem view is that it's driven by interactions across nodes — that's what defines how the system evolves from its initial state. The way people interact with event components informs how the system evolves.

• Education model: Do you want people to rapidly exchange information about the system but risk dispersing it into disparate components?
  • — Characteristics: Characterized by rapid information exchange throughout the system. Individuals may group based on their amount of knowledge rather than shared interests.
  • — Info flow: centripetal force toward the experts in the room.
  • — Practically: increase concentration around expert mentors and ensure easy access to resources (APIs, design tools, etc).
• Playground model: Similar issue with dispersal, but instead of focusing on exchanging information across the entire diagram, you concentrate exchange within local nodes. Practically, this looks like adopting multiple "challenges" or event topics.
  • — Characteristics: Characterized by rapid exchange within siloed groups followed by slower diffusion across groups.
  • — Info flow: diffusion model — random nodes constantly recombining and disseminating.
  • — Practically: concentrate effort around creative prompts or diverse themes participants can bucket under.
• Mission model: The event is synchronized under a single concept. Participants are collectively actioning to meet a shared problem.
  • — Characteristics: Synchronized under a single concept with participants collectively actioning to meet a shared problem.
  • — Info flow: linear.
  • — Practically: strong theming or prompts (e.g., category-specific hackathons like sustainability) that constrain and align efforts toward a unified goal.

Your ultimate model can be a combination of these, but defining this early prevents misalignment later.

Step 1: Define the spatial layout.

This is the skeleton of your ecosystem — the physical diagram that dictates how information will flow through the system. Define the zones of the room (where judges, participants, and internal teams will primarily be). A messy layout that mixes these groups manipulates the vibe in the wrong direction.

Step 2: Map the temporal flow.

Define how time moves through the space. Build a high-level timeline of what is essential and when it should happen, then map that chronology back to the layout.

Step 3: Set up the comms infrastructure.

This is the connective tissue. How will you communicate schedules, announcements, and live updates? Draft all key emails in advance. Set up Slack channels and other comms systems before launch.

Step 4: Add the seasoning.

Once structure is set, go on a concentrated execution sprint to curate and churn out all tangible elements — swag, graphics, food, and visual polish.

These should happen continuously:

• Sponsorships and fundraising: follows an 80/20 curve. Your largest contributions will come from a select few sponsors. Treat it as a numbers game early on — bias toward quantity first, then hyper-invest when someone shows real interest.
• Casting (speakers, mentors, judges): coherence matters more than titles. People who get along naturally create a more cohesive judging and mentoring environment.
• Marketing: the friend-group effect is strongest in college. Target where communities already gather. Partner with clubs and get their names on your event — it's the fastest way to start a chain reaction.

1. How do you get started when you've never done this before?

Start with the system. Draft a Google Doc explaining why this event should exist. What are you trying to simulate in the ecosystem? Define your event model and theming.

Define the interactions:

• Definition: Start with the physical layout (location), temporal flow (schedule), and feedback systems that tie them together (judges, announcements).
• Execution: Finalize the room early — it dictates everything else.

At the very end, curate the experience: the documents, the aesthetics, food. All the elements that people will subconsciously associate with your event.

2. What have people given significant positive reviews on?

People don't remember things you throw at them (even if that's cool-looking merch). They recall the moments they made with friends. This is not something you can hand them. You must create an ecosystem that can foster this serendipity.

3. What is significantly challenging about organizing something like this?

You underestimate the amount of time orchestration demands. It's easy to copy and paste templates from other events. It takes a lot more labour to create the connective tissue between these siloed artifacts. Spend a significant chunk of time syncing.

4. What is something often overlooked?

People will remember negative experiences far more than positive ones. Focus on executing a solid, frictionless event rather than overextending on ambition. The philosophy is simple: polish over spectacle.