From a system theory viewpoint, equality is a term which helps to keep the always much more probable inequality in view. Equality, itself, is a highly unlikely state (like order), because, when it has been reached, all further possibilities lead once more to inequality. Every event, every actor, every intention becomes a threat to the equality or equilibrium achieved. So it is no wonder that actors who follow interests usually start with inequality (or unfairness) and demand equality (or fairness). They use the differences of the existing in order to legitimise the steering towards less disparity. This helps to bring neglected interests or problems back into play. However, it threatens to allow one to forget that equality (or the rule of the so far neglected) is not, per se, good and is not a sustainable state. Hardly anything generates as much resistance, opposition or mistrust than the idea of equality. Everybody suspects that, fundamentally, it will ultimately always produce other inequalities. This is not necessarily bad.
Here, it is relevant for this theory of change that it rests upon the fact that paradoxes can only be resolved by masking something (and thus becoming unequal). Organisations, teams and people, therefore, also need, particularly, competence to ‘manage’ inequality differently, rather than relying on equality. This would be the end of all differentiation possibilities and the ability to make decisions. Asymmetry is a prerequisite for systems and the idea of equality an element for regulating it.