Swarms inside the boundary and swarms outside the boundary are wildly different situations.

Here's a way to intuitively grasp it.

Imagine that once you decide an approach to a product, you can't change it once you launch it.

Let's imagine it has a 10% chance of working.

Imagine only having one of these that you can execute on.

You have one bet in the market, with a 10% chance of success.

Now imagine having 10 experiments in the market.

But now even with the same 10% chance of working, your chance of one of them being a success is 65%.

Any individual bet is still just as likely to fail, but the likelihood of the collective working is much higher.

You can improve your success rate by increasing the baseline level of success… or by having many more bets.

How much it costs to make an incremental bet is a key determinant of the strategy's success.

If you are one company, every additional bet causes additional coordination cost and turbulent flow in the organization.

If you are an investment fund, every additional bet doesn't create significant coordination costs in the same way.

This is the difference between a time series average and a portfolio average.

The entity who benefits from ergodicity structurally does better.

Part of that strength comes from letting go of needing to be one thing with a coherent self-image.