Focal points require prominence and uniqueness to coordinate action

Evidence

A prime characteristic of most of these “solutions” to the problems, that is, of the clues or coordinators or focal points, is some kind of prominence or conspicuousness. But it is a prominence that depends on time and place and who the people are. Ordinary folk lost on a plane circular area may naturally go to the center to meet each other; but only one versed in mathematics would “naturally” expect to meet his partner at the center of gravity of an irregularly shaped area. Equally essential is some kind of uniqueness; the man and his wife cannot meet at the “lost and found” if the store has several. The writer’s experiments with alternative maps indicated clearly that a map with many houses and a single crossroads sends people to the crossroads, while one with many crossroads and a single house sends most of them to the house. Partly this may reflect only that uniqueness conveys prominence; but it may be more important that uniqueness avoids ambiguousness. — Thomas C. Schelling, The Strategy of Conflict, 148

Categorization

  • XREF: The empirical map experiments give concrete evidence for how salience shapes coordination — analogous to how a single dominant protection racket or a single agreed-upon code becomes the natural focal enforcement convention. — connects to: Tacit coordination works through mutually recognized focal points — Thomas C. Schelling, The Strategy of Conflict, 134; Unstable focal points serve as signals rather than as outcomes — Thomas C. Schelling, The Strategy of Conflict, 268; A mediator can create focal points through dramatic suggestion — Thomas C. Schelling, The Strategy of Conflict, 334 (+2 more)

Broader Connections