Since there is no formal order in the realm of IR, order arises from the interest and interaction of units towards economic markets; this conditions their calculations, their behaviors and their interactions allowing states to have an overall correct prediction of the states' actions and intentions. Therefore, structural theory wants to know how companies' decisions are influenced by their market and how people's behavior is influenced by the positions they hold. Because of this common and firm economic goal on the part of all states, rigid structures develop that reward or punish behavior. Since there is a set of rigid structures, there are also expectations created to succeed in the international economic system, these expectations and structures better help predict a country's actions which reductionist theory cannot explain. Therefore structure theory creates greater understanding or IR Since structure can remain while actors' personality, behavior, and interactions change, it may be a better priority to study if one wants to anticipate the intent of a state. So what reductionist couldn't explain what leaders' true intentions are? structural theory can do this by examining the systemic forces at play. When using structural theory you can also apply the structural definition to different areas, as long as the arrangement of the parts is similar; thus a definition may be applicable to other domains, making the theory of greater use than reductionist theory. For example, when the Soviet Union invaded Poland in 1945, political analysts do not have to reanalyze the structure of Poland because we already know it from the regime of the Soviet Union.