A system's mechanisms are fast or slow. Fast mechanisms are inherent and thus adopted by default. Slow mechanisms are formed by actors and take time, energy and cooperation. Actors are things which knowingly or unknowingly take advantage of fast mechanisms and are composed of slow mechanisms.
Fast mechanisms are fast because they are static in the system. Some systems heavily comprised of fast mechanisms are nature, unregulated markets and pure democracies. All of these systems can thrive under the correct circumstances, but their inherent problems are insurmountable. Natural selection is a fine mechanism for change if you're willing to wait for millions of years. Unregulated markets are bountiful until monopolies inevitably form. Pure democracies are effective until size makes discourse impossible.
Accepting fast mechanisms (aka doing nothing) with no other action is taking a leap of faith that the system will not collapse. All systems collapse eventually from the perspective of a status quo, thus humans are always fighting to keep a set of status quos. Examples of status quos many take for granted are a breathable atmosphere, farmable soil and potable water. None of the aforementioned things would exist for long in a world dependent only on fast mechanisms, thus durable human systems employ slow mechanisms in order to protect the status quos which people depend on.
Another important thing about fast mechanisms is that many exist unbeknownst to the actors within the system, thus effective actors take time to discover the fast mechanisms within their system. Fast mechanisms can also be greatly misunderstood and entire disciplines can be formed around faulty understanding (e.g. alchemy, witchcraft, religious practices). The process of discovering fast mechanisms is what humans call science.
Examples of fast mechanisms:
Slow mechanisms are slow because they require pre-meditation and time for integration. There is an infinite set of slow mechanisms to employ and this is part of what makes them slow: time must be allocated for searching the space of mechanisms. Another reason slow mechanisms are slow is they take time to be truly adopted after having been formally adopted by the system. A historical example of adoption lag is the 30 years over which the Sherman Anti-Trust laws were in place but too vague to enforce; it took economic collapse for anti-trust to be enforced and even today such laws are difficult to enforce.
Effective slow mechanisms are designed with awareness of fast mechanisms. An example from history where slow mechanisms were deployed without consideration of fast mechanisms is the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The Telecommunications Act was supposed to promote competition, universalize media and more. The slow mechanisms in the act were not taking into account important fast mechanisms, namely market consolidation and the subsequent product homogeneity. That oversight, whether intentional or not, actually broke the industry beyond what was fixed.
All human work considers the design, deployment, or utilization of slow mechanisms. Scientists use slow mechanisms to discover more fast mechanisms in our universe.
Examples of slow mechanisms:
Governance is the act of creating, deploying and enforcing soft mechanisms. Continued governance requires understanding the fast mechanisms at play, and employing soft mechanisms without that knowledge is always an inferior strategy. Ruling a group without understanding their culture/practices never leads to flourishing. Controlling economies without understanding markets results in failure. Building bridges without understanding architectural principles is bad news. But how can a slow mechanism designer know all of the fast mechanisms? They can only hope they have taken enough time to search for fast mechanisms. There is a tradeoff between searching for fast mechanisms and searching for soft mechanisms, but it can be avoided by diversifying your expert base!
Experts are those who understand a set of slow mechanisms and the fast mechanisms they interact with. Whoever is deploying slow mechanisms should be leaning heavily on a set of diverse experts with a wide collective knowledge base. Without knowledge of the relevant fast mechanisms at play, slow mechanisms will not stand the test of time.
Decision-making positions contain power and thus attract power-seekers. Power-seekers are not inherently good or expert in their position. If all types of experts exist then it follows that sociopolitical experts exist. These experts specialize in understanding how to climb the rungs but do not always provide knowledge value for the system-as-a-whole. Over-abundance of social climbing experts is dangerous to the health of the system since they are so good at filling space, and if that space should be occupied by a true expert, that space is underserved.
The main type of social expert is a politician. A politician's optimal role should be as a conduit for true experts. They should climb the social ladder, occupy space, and allow for real world experts to influence their decisions since their decisions impact the real world, not just the political sphere.