an equilibrium situation is one in which individual plans are fully coordinated. Each plan can be successfully executed. Means are exactly matched to ends. (Peter Lewin, Capital In Disequilibrium)
If this is the definition of equilibrium (which he derives from Hayek's definition), then I have never once found myself in a situation one could define as equilibrium. Nor has any artist. What writer could honestly say that any work of art they set out to write was exactly as they planned it? Even before the editor got ahold of it? If there was ever any feedback from anyone at any time, one's plans changed. I one was interrupted while writing, one's plans changed.
Add let us get back to the issue of an editor. The editor has one thing in mind, the author another. How likely is it that their individual plans will ever become fully coordinated? Or will they match up well enough to go ahead and publish at some point (hopefully)?
And what about the audience? If there is no coordination, the work fails. But if we are talking about a play, the playwright can respond by changing the play. The playwright might deviate away from his own plans for the piece in order to make it more successful. Is this a true coordination of plans?
The fact is that disequilibrium is what we more often see. More, we see a far from equilibrium situation -- which is where creativity necessarily takes place.