EmpiricalRequires evidence

Part I states the limit of its own central concept, and the limit is precisely the job of Part II. In the manuscript's words, the idea of an attractor state only tells us that more efficient dominant designs from the customer's perspective are likely to win out against less efficient ones, and it does not tell us how to get there; the attractor state is a theoretical construction defining the most efficient possible state for an industry. Part I then asks the question directly: how can we bridge the gap between current reality and a theoretical future industry attractor state. The section is titled stepping stones to attractor states and the stepping stones are not there. So the honest account is that Part I supplies a destination and names the missing route, and Part II is the attempt to supply it. The attractor is an orientation device with its limits stated, not a mechanism and not a prediction.

Capital mechanisms