Understanding the secret of evolution’s unwritten rules

Game theorists first used strategic puzzles—Prisoner’s Dilemma, Chicken game—to explore how rational decisions clash and stabilize. When John Maynard Smith applied this to evolution, the result was the Evolutionarily Stable Strategy, or ESS, a breakthrough in biology. Imagine two male birds competing for territory: one fights fiercely like a “hawk,” the other retreats like a “dove.” If everyone behaved as a dove, a lone hawk wins easily. If everyone fought as hawks, both get hurt. Somewhere in between—say 60% hawks, 40% doves—neither type can do better by switching strategies. That mix, the ESS, remains stable through generations.

The ESS is not a conscious choice but an emergent property of repeated interactions. It explains why animal fights seldom end in deadly violence; instead they ritualize aggression to maintain a stable ratio of risk and reward. ESS underpins behaviors from mating rituals to resource sharing. When conditions shift—predators change, resources vanish—the stable mix may shift too, leading to new evolutionary peaks.

In human terms, ESS applies to office politics, social norms, and negotiation tactics. Whether we’re deciding to speak up in meetings (“hawk”) or listen (“dove”), the collective payoff often settles into a predictable balance. Recognizing these unwritten rules helps us navigate conflicts with greater foresight.

ESS reframes “winning” not as total dominance, but as achieving a strategy mix that no rival can successfully invade. That insight alone can transform how we view cooperation and competition in any complex system.

Think of a recurring tension in your day—perhaps speaking up in meetings versus keeping the peace. List the pay-offs and costs for both moves, then imagine how a 60/40 mix might actually stabilize the team’s productivity. Rather than flipping to extremes, you start spotting the natural middle ground that no one can unseat. Tonight, try that calibrated approach with one conversation.