Less performance, more robustness
- David Moreno
- 4 days ago
- 6 min read
Updated: 2 days ago
Recent discoveries in systems biology give rise to a new hope: that of trading performance (so precious in the eyes of the West) for robustness, this fundamental principle of life whose richness we will see.
Darwin's *On the Origin of Species* has often been misinterpreted (social Darwinism), a misconception still widespread today: that only the strongest or best adapted are selected during evolution. This distorted reading of Darwinian theory arose from the socio-economic context of the 19th-century Industrial Revolution, which already valued performance and the optimization of technical processes.
Darwin's theory has thus been instrumentalized to justify a competitive logic specific to industrial societies, far removed from the actual mechanisms of living organisms. In other words, it is not living organisms that have inspired our social models, but rather our societies that have projected onto nature their own understanding of how they function.
Olivier Hamant, a biologist and researcher at INRAE, states it clearly in his essay *Antidote to the Cult of Performance* : “ Living beings are not high-performing : they are neither effective (they have no objective) nor efficient (they waste enormous amounts of energy and resources). ” In short, and contrary to what we are led to believe, social Darwinism does not occur in nature. The researcher reminds us of what Darwin actually asserted: in evolution, it is the individuals with desirable traits that are selected. This is far from the simplistic idea of the “strongest” or the “best adapted.” On the other hand, living beings demonstrate great resilience in the face of environmental fluctuations—a quality from which we would do well to learn!
The robustness of living systems
Let's examine a fascinating mechanism: photosynthesis. The energy contained in sunlight allows plants and trees to convert some of the CO₂ present in the air into organic matter. However, this essential physicochemical process is remarkably inefficient: it has a yield of approximately 1%, meaning that only 1% of solar energy is captured and transformed (the remaining 99% is, so to speak, wasted).
One might expect such a vital mechanism to be perfectly optimized. Well, no! Olivier Hamant doesn't hesitate to write, somewhere between mild provocation and questioning: "We are a far cry from solar panels and their efficiency of around 15%. No trace of optimization in 3.8 billion years—that should give us pause. "
Of course, this (very) low performance has an explanation. The biologist quickly gives the essential point: if photosynthesis were optimized solely to maximize yield, plants would lose their ability to adapt to fluctuations in light, between day and night, or from one season to another.
Nature allows itself considerable leeway to manage fluctuations, turbulence, and even storms. This is what robustness is: coping with unpredictable and abrupt variations. Nature has favored a robust strategy over an efficient one, allowing plants to adapt rather than produce at full capacity in an unstable world.
An even more striking example is the human body temperature, which remains around 37°C under normal conditions. Strangely, most of our enzymes exhibit optimal activity around 40°C. Some can even be nearly a million times more active (and therefore more efficient) at this temperature than at 37°C. Yet, at 37°C, our body adequately performs its physiological functions.
This metabolic process is not accidental: this 37°C temperature provides a crucial buffer for dealing with unforeseen events, such as the arrival of a virus or bacteria. The fever then allows for a temporary increase in body temperature and stimulates certain immune defenses to fight the pathogen.
But this enzymatic performance cannot last: beyond a few days, a fever of 40°C seriously degrades certain proteins and can lead to death. And Olivier Hamant commented, in a way that evokes the current overheating in the workplace: " For the living, performance is primarily the risk of burnout. "
Finally, the third and last example: DNA replication during cell division.
During DNA replication, new cells are generated from old ones by complete copying of the genetic code. Copying errors occur during this replication. These deviations play a fundamental role in the robustness of life: they introduce mutations that sometimes prove beneficial, giving rise to genetic diversity and the adaptation of species.
For example, scientists have discovered a genetic mutation in Tibetans that helps their red blood cells transport oxygen more effectively. Thanks to this adaptation, they can better withstand the lack of oxygen at high altitudes. This mutation actually originated from a small, accidental error that occurred several thousand years ago. It was preserved and passed down because of its usefulness for living in the Himalayan mountains.
Here too, contrary to what one might expect: it is precisely because it is imperfect that DNA replication is robust. Copying errors open up a space for exploration: they allow life to take paths that nature, if it had been strictly precise, would never have trod.
Moving away from a culture of productivity, particularly in hospitals
Olivier Hamant gives a central place to the idea of robustness, which he opposes to optimization, because it is much better suited to the increasing instability of the contemporary world, with its share of repeated political crises, social injustices, ecological disasters, geopolitical tensions and wars.
Hamant pays particular attention to the hospital: " If there is one sector where performance is justified, it is in emergency services where the efficiency of caregivers is vital for patients. But should this principle be applied constantly? " Obviously not!
The hospital, a place of care and human connection par excellence, has been distorted by the importation of managerial approaches from industry. It has become a production space, subject to profitability objectives, at the expense of time, listening, empathy—in short, everything that underpins the relationship of trust between caregivers and patients. And Olivier Hamant emphasizes: “ When it is temporary, performance is beneficial for the patient. Continuously, it leads to neglected care, disengagement, burnout, and, in a truly Kafkaesque absurdity, it jeopardizes the financial and human survival of the hospital. ”
To understand the importance of robustness according to Olivier Hamant, let us allow ourselves a thought experiment: a flashback to the Covid-19 crisis.
Imagine for a moment a robust public hospital, designed like a living organism, with significant flexibility, capable of withstanding the unexpected… like a pandemic. Would we have needed to resort to widespread lockdowns? Probably not.
Back to reality… let’s remember, March 2020. The lack of intensive care beds, the insufficient number of trained staff and the shortage of equipment (the result of decades of optimization) led to the decisions we know: a total lockdown, the shutdown of the economy, the closure of schools and the isolation of the elderly.
Cutting public services budgets has increased our reliance on emergency solutions. In this case, that choice ultimately proved far more costly than an adaptable hospital system: several hundred billion euros, not to mention the impact on mental health, education, and social cohesion. The difficult experience of Covid-19 stands as a perfect illustration of the detrimental consequences of over-optimization at all costs, because one cannot be both highly efficient and highly resilient. The lack of resilience in hospitals has weakened the entire society.
Valuing mistakes, cultivating slowness and diversity in schools
If there is one area where our societies must invest to shift from performance to resilience, it is undoubtedly education. The school system remains too focused on individual performance, competition between students, and recognition reduced to a grade: it values linear and rapid success, and punishes mistakes.
Here too, if we imagined the school as a living organism, we would encourage exploration (therefore the production without complex of trial and error), and we would promote cooperation, the richness of interactions, the diversity of points of view, as well as critical thinking in respect of others.
In the school of resilience, knowledge takes root over the long term because students themselves actively seek out information instead of passively waiting for teachers to provide it. Children's self-esteem and recognition at school are no longer based on grades, but on sharing their own discoveries with their peers. It is through sharing that we validate our knowledge. As the author says, " In the school of competition, we surpassed others. In the school of cooperation, we surpass ourselves with the help of others. "
Olivier Hamant concludes his essay on an optimistic note: we have no choice. If we want a viable collective future, we must change our paradigm: abandon the cult of performance and become resilient. We may, however, have our doubts, given how destructive the neoliberalism in which we find ourselves, as well as the rise of an increasingly pervasive fascism, are to any form of resilience. That said, we have no other serious task than to tackle it.
This text is the result of an automated translation. The first version of this text (in French) is available at the following address:
Sources :
Olivier Hamant, Antidote au culte de la performance : la robustesse du vivant éd. Tracts Gallimard, 2023, 64 pages
Olivier Hamant – Wikipedia
