“Wouldn’t this (number of contributors) also depend on the type of the organization? Like in a family owned business for example, you would strategically want more workers and less contributors, and there might be others which might be more ‘open-spaced’ organizations where you would automatically have empowered people and hence contributors.”

Yes and no, because what seems to be happening is the conventional wisdom which even we held for a long time, is that it should be that knowledge organizations should want more contributors because they are open structures etc., traditional processed based manufacturing systems may not need such contributors in such great degree because it was anyway designed like that originally. But what we are noticing is that the minute change hits an organization, all rules shift. The minute there is some form of transition or rapid evolution or rapid change that takes place, at that time you suddenly need contributors at the helm of things all over the place. So I think if you want to distinguish in types of organizations, it is whether organizations are undergoing change or not that should be the criteria. The more non-change there is, the more people can settle down into structures and allocation of processes. The minute there is uncertainty and changes taking place you need contributors. Therefore it is less to do with the type of organization or the type of work, but it has more to do with the evolutionary journey.