The Source Principles presented here are based on ongoing research carried out by Peter Koenig.
Through his work as a management consultant beginning in the 1980s, Peter Koenig became curious about why organizational change projects so often fail, and why the vision of the founder of an endeavor so often fails to materialize.
During dozens of small workshops with initiators and entrepreneurs where the stories of their vision and initiatives are explored, a set of principles emerged. They provide a guide to how human initiatives operate. Their seeming universality has profound implications for founders, and by extension, the operation of organizations of all kinds.
Many tensions, conflicts, successes, and failures in organizations which can often be hard to unpick, can be easily explained through a lens of Source. This presents a huge opportunity to work consciously, creating initiatives that run smoothly and in a creative, cooperative way.
The fundamentals of the Source Principles have been confirmed hundreds of times in practice during Koenig’s research. The operational implications of working with Source are ongoing. Have a look at this website https://workwithsource.com/, which is a growing resource for practitioners. Your questions and stories are welcomed.
Koenig doesn’t claim that his research is scientific. A scientific approach to testing the principles by an interested party would be welcomed to further the research.

We use the term "Source" for the founder of a project or an initiative, to underline that this first person has a special relationship to the project as well as to the responsibilities and privileges associated with it. It's a relationship that extends well beyond the operational. We are convinced that achieving a deeper understanding of the role of the Source can sometimes be decisive for the success of a business and the quality of life of the people involved.
Over years of experimentation, it appears that the terms 'project' and 'business' can and should be interpreted very broadly. The Source Principles play a role in all areas of life where people become creative and bring something into the world. Even interpersonal relationships have a Source (e.g. “I invite you to join my initiative” – then you become the Source of this relationship).
The Source Principles have been explored and developed through a 20-year-plus process of action research. As a result, the Source Principles now seem to be consistent and reliable. The principles can or even should be considered whenever starting or managing any kind of activity, building decision structures, or analyzing the health of given structures in organizations.
Floor and Sylvia: “As coaches, we regularly deal with people who are dissatisfied with their situation, whether private or professional. We often check whether it is due to some kind of "misalignment" of source and sub-source relationships in the life of the client or in the structure of a group (e.g. a team). This occurs far more often than one might think. A realignment can have a very positive effect on the corresponding relationships and on the people involved. This in turn can result in new vigor, verve, clarity and empowerment.”
Peter Koenig likes to emphasize that "what I refined in many iterations and then named 'Source Principles' don’t come from a preconceived theory but are an attempt at a distilled-out description of ‘what works when work works’ (cf. Charles de Mornay Davies). They reinforce the fact that to be part of the emergence of a brilliant working whole each person needs to simultaneously concentrate not only on the vision for the whole, but on manifesting their vision of their own special part with their unique brilliance; with no holds barred on their full power, authority, and responsibility. This is like musicians in an orchestra playing a Beethoven symphony, where each is totally concentrating on bringing out magic with his or her instrument, yet at the same time through the conductor’s lead, is in touch, connected and attuned to the whole. It’s the experience of this that is inspiring and empowering for everyone."

In this article we want to start with five main principles to give you a first insight into the Source Work – at the same time strongly inviting you to double check with your own experience in dealing with projects, initiatives, etc. Don’t simply believe us, but verify with your own experience.

This first principle outlined here is at the same time the core principle of all and probably the most challenging one for some people.

The so-called Source is a person with a vision for the whole, the ‘conductor’ of the orchestra. In an initiative this will be the originating founder (or the founder’s orderly successor), the person to take the first intentional step to manifest an idea or vision which was until this point just abstract.

This moment is highly significant because what the Source person is actually doing is acting as a ‘channel’ for manifesting something into material form that was previously just an idea; a creation out of nothing. There’s a responsibility attached to this which can only be ascribed to the Source-person because nobody else is involved at that moment.

This does not however negate the importance of other people, who will need to be brought in, and will want to be responsible for parts of the project. The Source Principles describe how this all works together, including certain privileges the Source has as counterpart to the responsibility they hold.

This starts by the Source recognizing themself in their Source role. If there’s a failure here no-one else will recognize the Source, nor be able to find their own secure and satisfactory place in the project.

These may be Sub-Sources (see below), whose prime motivation is to focus on and realize their own visions. But the Source may also be helped by ‘paid employees’ in a more conventional sense. In this relationship the Source acts in the conventional role of “Boss”.

The Source's full focus is called to the activities that only the Source can perform (see below). So, operations are best managed by Sub-Sources.

The Principles pay attention to the critical role of Succession, especially the psychological and ritual aspects which are often neglected, yet necessary for the process of transmission to be orderly and complete. This refers not just to the good transfer of an initiative as a whole, but also to the orderly passage of someone’s role to a successor when they leave an initiative.

The role of the Source from the moment of inception is to continue to receive and hold the vision/idea of the whole initiative as it develops over time; to figure out and decide on the next steps, one after the other as they become clear; and to communicate these to the people involved. Also, to ensure and manage that activity taking place in the field in the name of the project is within this field and coherent with the vision. Along with this 100% responsibility comes 100% decision-making power. This is because nobody but the Source continues to receive the full information for the whole project as it unravels and develops, not just mentally but in all visceral senses and in every cell of their body.

Expressing all this so clearly sometimes raises concerns or objections about hierarchy and equality so it’s necessary to reinforce the point that this statement is not made to diminish the role of others in the project. On the contrary, the Source Principles emphasize that when the project is working well each person plays a unique, important role, operating as Source over a specialist part of the project, with equivalent 100% sovereign responsibility and 100% decision-making power over their respective parts. Their contributions are essential.

Nonetheless, the life of the project depends on the Source and if they lose interest in or leave it, it will start to die (unless there is an orderly succession). Everyone else involved has more freedom to come and go. Should they leave, this may cause difficulty, but it will not be lethal. So, to make a clear distinction illustrating the relationship between the sovereignty of the Source who is alone responsible for the whole initiative and the sovereignty of those with responsibility over their Sub-parts, the term “Sub-Source” can be used for the latter. The Source creates out of nothing, the Sub-sources create within a field already created by the Source. This is the major distinction between the two.

Comprehending this results in an understanding that a natural order of organization emerges over time and is present in every living initiative (in its ‘informal’ organization rather than its organigram), like blossoms emerging from leaves, emerging from twigs, emerging from branches, emerging from the trunk of a tree, within a forest, within an ecosystem. This is in fact a hierarchy (etymology: sacred order) in terms of design, but in an enterprise, it functions through fundamental respect, recognition and support of the creativity, sovereignty and mutual interdependence of each respective part or person, rather than via a conventional command-and-control system.

To be clear about it, this ‘Order’ of organizational relationship is given by the time of initiation into the initiative, represented by the relationship between someone new who joins and someone already part of the initiative who brings them in.

On the other hand, where Source Principles are consciously applied this order doesn’t mean that Source and Sub-sources can’t or shouldn’t challenge each other in each other’s decision-making processes. On the contrary this can be very important to ensure that decisions which will be translated into action are good and clear, for the benefit of all. The importance of this becomes especially evident where a Source or Sub-source fails to assume, or relinquishes their responsibility and decision-making power, or in other situations where the order fails to be followed.

The first step in a particular situation is to go back into the history of the initiative, to establish who was the original founder( = Source) and track what happened to the ‘Source-line’ of successions between the founding moment and the present. This historical Source-line may reveal that some current issues might have been inherited from the persona of the original Source, now embodied in the present Source and so manifest throughout the whole system. A good coach will know how to help the Source expand their persona in the present time and so the entire system in the initiative.

A second Source-line is that between the Source and Sub-sources. Where there is a limitation in the Source’s persona this is likely at some point to be experienced as a limitation by the Sub-Sources in their own fields of activity, as they develop and become more conscious. They will then automatically start to apply pressure/feedback on the Source. If the Source doesn’t respond they will blow back even stronger until they do or leave. Once again, a coach will recognize what is happening and help manage/grow the system to the benefit of Source, Sub-Sources and all.

One of the most frequent errors is the belief that there can be more than one Source and the Source responsibility can be shared equally between two or more people.

A second related mistake is the belief that multiple people can have a “Common Purpose” or “Shared Vision”. This notion has become popular in recent years but wastes a lot of time, energy, and money. A purpose or vision is something not limited in time, is intimate, unique, and dynamically changing, related to ‘me’ or ‘you’ personally and individually. Any attempt to define it as ‘ours’ must water it down in a compromise. By contrast, a task, a goal, an objective, or a mission which is limited in time and space (“we’ll put a man on the moon by the end of the decade”) absolutely needs to be common and shared in time and space between many people. The recognition of the distinction related to time and space between these two is important.

Clearly familiarity with the principles is essential, not just as an intellectual pursuit but in terms of an intuitive understanding.

Coaching on Source matters involves two phases.
1. Analytical/diagnostic phase, relatively quick and short but very helpful, indicating what needs to happen, where and with whom.
2. Action phase, accompanying the Source or Sub-Sources in taking action and making necessary corrections over time.

“A Little Red Book about Source” by Stefan Merckelbach and “Work with Source” by Tom Nixon are both excellent introductions containing 26 Source Principles in an expanded book form with background details. For further immersion, contact with trained Source practitioners is recommended, see www.workwithsource.com