Systems cannot be symmetric. Otherwise they would not be distinguishable from anything! The phenomenon of symmetry breaking is found in physics (for example, the left/right spin in elementary particles), in chemistry (dissipative structures) or in mathematics (laws of form). Two sides are required and the choice of one of the two sides, so that stability (through repetition of this choice) and identity (through non-observation of the other side) becomes possible.
Thus, systems are constantly occupied with asymmetry, stabilisation of the beneficial imbalance, necessary re-symmetrisations and renewed utilisation of the chances of asymmetry.
There is much to suggest that this also applies to the psyche, teams, organisations and their couplings. Here are some examples: the psychological development is characterised by asymmetries (such as wanting to win a game), group dynamics operate, amongst other things, for the comparison of opportunities for influence and popularity, organisations, for example, create positions with different levels of power, reputation and temporal stability.
The more symmetrical the conditions are, the more chances they offer for the creation of asymmetry and the more unequal the conditions, the more the need is created to legitimise these and to win or maintain agreement for them. If the latter fails, then an attempt is usually made to reduce the inequality by means of upheavals (such as revolutions, strikes, bullying, or refusal), by dissolving into equality or by leading into ‘improved’ inequality.