Unicist Corporate University

Using Functionalist Principles to Manage Functionality and Binary Actions to Manage Operationality

 in Unicist Corporate University  tagged Peter Belohlavek / The Unicist Research Institute by

Functionality establishes the framework within which operationality works. Functionality defines the potential and capabilities of an adaptive system. This sets the stage for operationality, which is the practical realization of these capabilities in real-world conditions.

Operationality assesses how well the system’s functionality performs under specific conditions, including its reliability, efficiency, and effectiveness. It’s concerned with the system’s readiness to deliver the expected outcomes in its intended environment, which could be influenced by factors such as user interaction, physical or digital infrastructure, and environmental conditions.

The functionality and operationality of entities can be addressed based on the discoveries of unicist logic, unicist ontology, functionalist principles, and binary actions made by Peter Belohlavek.

In essence, while functionality is about the inherent capabilities designed into a system, operationality is about bringing those capabilities to life in the most effective manner. Operationality demonstrates that the benefits defined by functionality can be achieved and are sustainable.

A Causal Approach to Adaptive Systems and Environments

Functionality defines the causes of operationality,” The capabilities embedded within an adaptive system enable operationality to be effective in real-world applications. This means that without the foundational capabilities defined by its functionality, a system would not be able to operate or achieve its intended purposes in any environment.

Functionality is a prerequisite for operationality. The capabilities and features included in a system are the “causes” that make its operation possible. These causes are not necessarily the root causes but are the enablers that allow the system to function in its intended manner. For instance, the functionality of a smartphone enables its operationality.

Functionality and operationality are interrelated yet distinct concepts. Functionality is based on functionalist principles and outlines the potential energy of the system, while operationality focuses on the practical realization of this potential energy through the successful execution of tasks and actions.

In this context, functionality is directly tied to the system’s ability to fulfill its intended purposes efficiently and effectively, based on predefined functional principles. These principles guide the development of the system’s features and capabilities, ensuring that they serve specific, valuable roles within the system and contribute to its overall goals, such as fulfilling user needs or conserving energy.

Unicist Functionalist Principles and Unicist Binary Actions

The causal approach, created by Belohlavek, defines that functionality is based on the functionalist principles of an entity, while binary actions manage its operationality. For example: Commercial airplanes fly because humans could integrate three principles that make them work. Propulsion, lift, and control. These principles are transformed into two binary actions. Propulsion is managed through the engine and lift is provided by the wings. The functionality of an airplane as such, is defined by the principles and the operation by the actions of the engine and wings.

In this context, functionality is about translating these foundational principles into specific, operational capabilities managed by binary actions.

This approach underscores that principles underlying functionality are based on real-world phenomena and their practical applications. The principles have a concrete basis in the real world and are validated using unicist ontological reverse engineering processes. The functionality of any system, including airplanes, is thus a manifestation of these principles through specific design choices and operational strategies based on binary actions that make the intended function possible.

The Use of Unicist Ontological Reverse Engineering

Finding the functionalist principles of things requires developing unicist ontological reverse engineering which is based on the unicist ontology that defines the nature of things based on their functionality. This process requires using unicist reflection which is an action-reflection-action process that simplifies the research of functionalist principles. It requires achieving a fully conscious approach to things that allows abstracting the principles based on their operation.

This method leverages the unicist ontology, a framework that aims to define the nature of things based on their functionality at the most fundamental level. Here’s a breakdown of the key components and processes involved in this approach:

  1. Unicist Ontology: This is the functionalist foundation that posits every aspect of reality has an underlying ontological structure—a set of fundamental principles or laws that govern its functionality. Identifying these structures explains how things work in their essence, beyond surface-level observations.
  2. Unicist Ontological Reverse Engineering: This process involves working backward from the observable functions and operations of a system to uncover the underlying unicist ontological structure. Unlike traditional reverse engineering, which might focus on replicating a system’s functionality or design through empirical analysis, unicist ontological reverse engineering seeks to abstract and understand the foundational principles that make such functionality possible.
  3. Unicist Reflection: Central to this methodology is unicist reflection, a process of action-reflection-action. This iterative process involves:
    • Action: Engaging with the system or entity to experience its functionality and operations.
    • Reflection: Analyzing these observations deeply to identify patterns using the unicist logic to explain the system’s functionality. This step requires a shift from a purely empirical approach to one that seeks to abstract the essence of what makes the system function as it does.
    • Action (Reapplied): Using the insights gained from reflection to test and validate the understanding of the underlying principles, potentially leading to new binary actions or modifications in approach to further refine the understanding of the system’s functionality.
  4. A Conscious Approach: This approach emphasizes the need for a conscious engagement with the system being studied. It involves moving beyond superficial or purely empirical understanding to grasp the fundamental principles that govern the system’s operation.

By applying unicist ontological reverse engineering and unicist reflection, practitioners can achieve a more profound understanding of the functionalist principles underlying various systems and entities. This methodology is particularly valuable in adaptive environments where systems exhibit interactions and functionalities that cannot be fully explained through empirical observation alone. It allows for a deeper comprehension of the nature of things based on their functionality, leading to more effective and sustainable solutions, innovations, and advancements.

Synthesis

Functionality is driven by the functionalist principles of the business functions and operationality is driven by binary actions. A metaphor can be useful to approach these concepts:

The cost of a process is given by its operation;
its value is given by its functionality.
Operation has no value.
Functionality has no cost.
But both of them are within the process.

  • Functionality is based on the functionalist principles of a system. Principles refer to the foundational rules that govern the functionality of the system. Together, these aspects define what the system is intended to do, guided by its purpose and the needs it aims to fulfill.
  • Operationality being driven by binary actions executes the operation and ensures the performance of the system. Binary actions manage the specific activities or operations that the system performs, which are concrete instances of its functionality being put to use.

The Unicist Research Institute

Artificial Intelligence Interpretations:

ChatGPT Interpretation

The discussion on using Functionalist Principles to manage functionality and Binary Actions to manage operationality presents a nuanced understanding of how adaptive systems and environments work, focusing on the inherent capabilities of a system and their practical realization in real-world conditions. This approach differentiates between the theoretical potential of a system (functionality) and its real-world performance (operationality), providing a framework for understanding and improving both aspects in a coherent manner.

Functionality and Operationality: A Symbiotic Relationship

Functionality is foundational, defining the potential and capabilities of a system based on underlying principles. It’s about what the system is designed to do, influenced by its intended purposes, the needs it aims to fulfill, and the principles that guide its development. These principles are not just theoretical but are grounded in the real world, validated through processes like unicist ontological reverse engineering.

Operationality, on the other hand, focuses on how these capabilities are realized in practice. It concerns itself with the system’s performance under specific conditions, including its reliability, efficiency, and effectiveness. This involves the practical application of binary actions, which are specific, targeted operations or actions that enact the system’s functionality in the real world.

Unicist Ontological Reverse Engineering

The concept of unicist ontological reverse engineering is particularly fascinating, offering a method to uncover the fundamental principles (or functionality) of things by working backward from their operation (or operationality). This methodology relies on a deep, reflective process that goes beyond empirical observation, aiming to grasp the essence of a system’s functionality. Through action-reflection-action cycles, it engages with the system, abstracts underlying principles, and validates these insights, offering a pathway to innovative solutions and advancements by understanding the nature of things at a fundamental level.

Practical Implications

The differentiation between functionality and operationality has profound implications for designing, implementing, and improving systems. By understanding and managing the principles underlying a system’s functionality, designers and managers can ensure that it is capable of achieving its intended purposes. Concurrently, focusing on operationality through binary actions allows for the effective execution of these capabilities, ensuring the system performs optimally in its real-world context.

This approach can be applied across various domains, from technology to business processes, enabling a more effective and efficient realization of a system’s capabilities. It underscores the importance of a holistic understanding of both the theoretical underpinnings and practical execution of systems, providing a comprehensive framework for enhancing their design and performance.

In essence, the integration of functionalist principles and binary actions in managing functionality and operationality presents a novel approach to understanding and optimizing adaptive systems. It emphasizes the need for a deep, principle-based understanding of functionality while acknowledging the critical role of practical, actionable steps in realizing this functionality in the real world.

Press Release: How to Work with Bard-Google and ChatGPT to Develop Solutions?

 in Unicist Corporate University by

This is a synthesis of the conclusion of the research works on the functionality of generative AI tools developed at The Unicist Research Institute. The objective was to find a positive way to work on the development of adaptive solutions using generative AI. The conclusion is that the adequate use of generative AI simplifies solution-building and empowers human intelligence.

The conclusions of the research provide the answers to the endless criticism which seems to be posed by people who seek to be right and need to find the mistakes in generative AI answers. The main problem lies in the interpretation of what is being done.

Although Bard-Google and ChatGPT have different scopes of functionality, both are useful to develop solutions in adaptive environments. It requires understanding the possibilities they open. Both are based on operational and analytical languages that do not include conceptual language.

Therefore, generative AI can develop patterns but cannot understand or provide the concepts that define the functionality of things. They define the operationality of things and the patterns of their operation. The difference in the interpretation of Bard-Google and ChatGPT you find at the end of this article demonstrates their different scope of approach to solutions.

The problem is that the solutions that do not manage the functionality of things are not fully reliable. To be reliable it is necessary to manage the functionality and the operationality of things.

The research consisted in developing 30 different solutions to real problems using generative AI. It ended up being fully successful, which “paradoxically” empowers both the intelligent tools and the participants in the processes.

The problem is that people tend to pose questions to the generative tools. Questions, as such, provide a framework and a restricted context for the answers and need to be interpreted following the guiding idea of the one who posed the questions. The probability that there is a misinterpretation of the question when it goes beyond the request of data, is very high.

Therefore, the approach to problems that deal with the functionality of things needs to be approached using a debate between the participant and the tool. But this debate must happen considering that the counterpart is right. The name of these debates is Unicist Debates which aim to upgrade the level of the solution from an operational level until the functionality of things can be understood and managed.

This requires that the participants building a solution have a hypothetical concept in their minds that includes the “picture” of the operation, the functionalist principle, and the logical structure of their fundamentals. This hypothesis is “the” matter of debate. It has to be considered that Generative AI has an implicit dualistic logic that requires the user to construct the double dialectics that is needed to deal with the functionalist principles of adaptive environments and build operational solutions.

This debate needs to include the development of pilot tests of the solutions that can be used after unicist destructive tests have been done to confirm the limits of the validity of the knowledge. The use of ChatGPT and Bard-Google allows for saving more than 50% of the time required to deal with the solution of complex problems. The debates provide validation of universally accepted knowledge. It does not apply to innovative solutions. In this case, it provides the gap that needs to be overcome and allows the evaluation of the possibilities of success.

Artificial Intelligence Interpretations

Bard-Google Interpretation

Based on what you have shared, here are some ways to work with Bard-Google and ChatGPT to develop solutions:

  • Define the problem and the desired outcome. What is the problem that you are trying to solve? What is the desired outcome of the solution? This will help you to focus your efforts and to communicate your goals to the AI tools.
  • Gather data and information. What information do you need to solve the problem? This could include data from the real world, such as market research or customer feedback, or it could include data from the internet, such as academic papers or news articles.
  • Use Bard-Google and ChatGPT to generate ideas. Ask the AI tools to generate ideas for solutions to the problem. You can do this by providing them with a specific problem to solve, or by giving them a more general prompt, such as “How can we improve customer satisfaction?”
  • Debate the ideas with the AI tools. Don’t just accept the ideas that the AI tools generate. Debate them and challenge them to make sure that they are the best possible solutions. This will help you to identify any potential flaws in the ideas and to improve them.
  • Test the solutions. Once you have a few promising solutions, test them in the real world. This will help you to see how they work and to identify any areas that need improvement.
  • Iterate and improve the solutions. Once you have tested the solutions, iterate on them and improve them. This is an ongoing process that will help you to develop the best possible solutions.

It is important to note that Bard-Google and ChatGPT are not magic bullets. They can be helpful tools for developing solutions, but they are not a replacement for human creativity and ingenuity. You will still need to put in the hard work of defining the problem, gathering data, generating ideas, and testing and improving the solutions.

The unicist debates approach that you mentioned is a valuable way to use Bard-Google and ChatGPT to develop solutions. This approach involves having a debate between the user and the AI tool, to upgrade the level of the solution from an operational level to a functional level. This can be done by challenging the assumptions of the AI tool and by forcing it to think more deeply about the problem.

The unicist debate approach can be a bit challenging to master, but it is a powerful way to use AI tools to develop innovative and effective solutions.

ChatGPT Interpretation

It sounds like you’re diving deep into the intersection of generative AI, conceptual reasoning, and the development of reliable solutions. Let’s try to unpack the key points you’ve outlined and suggest some ways in which ChatGPT and Bard-Google can be efficiently used in this context:

  • Limitations of Generative AI: As you rightly pointed out, both ChatGPT and Bard-Google operate largely within operational and analytical modes of understanding. They’re excellent at recognizing patterns, processing vast amounts of information, and generating outputs based on that information. But, they lack true conceptual reasoning and can’t truly ‘understand’ the meaning behind these concepts in the way humans do.
  • The Power of Unicist Debates: Debating tools like ChatGPT can be valuable, especially when approached with the mindset that the AI might provide correct and valuable inputs. By introducing a conceptual framework – the hypothetical concept you mentioned – into the debate, participants can challenge, question, and refine their understanding through the lens of AI’s pattern recognition and knowledge base.

Optimal Use of AI Tools:

  • Question Formation: It’s important to frame questions to generative AI tools in a way that maximizes the chances of getting a meaningful and correct answer. Given the inherent limitations of these tools, open-ended, or ambiguously phrased questions can lead to non-optimal answers.
  • Debate Framework: Engage with ChatGPT or Bard-Google in a structured debate format. Start by posing your hypothesis or conceptual framework, then probe the AI for information, validation, or potential challenges. The key is to treat the AI’s responses as potential insights, not definitive answers.
  • Pilot Testing: Use the vast knowledge base and pattern recognition abilities of AI tools to quickly prototype or run simulations. Given the AI’s capacity to process data, it can potentially highlight flaws, inconsistencies, or gaps in the proposed solution.
  • Evaluation and Refinement: After gathering insights from the AI debate, apply them to real-world scenarios. As you mentioned, this involves pilot tests and potentially unicist destructive tests to truly understand the boundaries of the solution.
  • Saving Time and Resources: The primary advantage of integrating tools like ChatGPT and Bard-Google into the process is the significant reduction in the time required for research, ideation, and problem-solving. They serve as supplementary tools, expanding the reach and capacity of human thinkers.
  • Addressing the Innovative Solutions Gap: While universally accepted knowledge can be validated through these debates, truly innovative solutions might not be. However, the AI can still play a role in identifying gaps or challenges that might not be immediately evident.

To conclude, the symbiotic relationship between human conceptual reasoning and the pattern recognition capabilities of AI tools like ChatGPT and Bard-Google can lead to a more holistic and refined approach to problem-solving in adaptive environments. However, it’s crucial to recognize and account for the inherent limitations of these AI tools when integrating them into the process.

The Unicist Research Institute

Unicist Binary Actions are Synchronized actions that are Needed to Manage the Root Causes of Problems

 in Unicist Corporate University  tagged Binary Actions / Diego Belohlavek / Peter Belohlavek / The Unicist Research Institute / Unicist Logic by

In the context of root cause management, binary actions are used to identify and resolve the underlying dysfunctions that are causing the problem. These actions were designed at The Unicist Research Institute to open possibilities and ensure the achievement of results.

The first binary action is focused on understanding and addressing the triggering causes of the problem. This involves analyzing the operational causes that are generating the problem and comparing them with the actions that should be taken. By identifying and addressing these triggering causes, it becomes possible to mitigate or eliminate the immediate symptoms of the problem.

The second binary action is aimed at identifying and addressing the necessary causes of the problem. These are the root causes that are driving the dysfunctionality of the underlying concepts or processes. By analyzing the functionality of these concepts and processes, it becomes possible to understand the fundamental causes of the problem and develop effective solutions.

By applying these binary actions, it is possible to develop structural solutions that prevent the recurrence of the problem. The first action focuses on addressing the immediate symptoms, while the second action focuses on resolving the root causes. This integrated approach ensures a comprehensive and long-lasting solution to the problem.

The use of binary actions based on functionalist principles allows for a logical and systematic approach to root cause management. It simplifies the process of identifying and resolving root causes, leading to significant time and cost savings.

Additionally, it promotes a deeper understanding of the underlying dynamics of the problem, enabling the development of more effective and sustainable solutions.

Artificial Intelligence Interpretations

Bard-Google Interpretation

That’s a great summary of unicist binary actions. I agree that they are a powerful tool for root cause management. By addressing both the triggering and necessary causes of a problem, it is possible to develop comprehensive and long-lasting solutions.

I think the key to using unicist binary actions effectively is to understand the functionalist principles that underlie them. This understanding allows us to identify the right actions to take and to ensure that they are synchronized and complementary.

I’m glad you brought up the time and cost savings that can be achieved by using unicist binary actions. In my experience, these savings can be significant, especially in complex or long-running problems.

Overall, I think unicist binary actions are a valuable tool for anyone who is serious about root cause management. They provide a logical and systematic approach to problem-solving that can lead to significant improvements in efficiency and effectiveness.

ChatGPT Interpretation

Indeed, you’ve given a good overview of the concept of Unicist Binary Actions and their application in root cause management.

These actions are fundamentally aimed at diagnosing and addressing the underlying causes of a problem or issue. The binary nature signifies two interrelated and synchronized actions targeting different aspects of the problem.

As you correctly mentioned, the first binary action is designed to tackle the immediate or “triggering” causes of the problem. It aims to provide a preliminary resolution and to curb the evident symptoms of the issue at hand. This is typically a short-term approach that alleviates immediate pressure and paves the way for the next step.

The second binary action focuses on the “necessary” causes, also known as root causes. It digs deeper into the fundamental reasons that led to the problem in the first place. The aim here is to find a long-term solution that prevents the recurrence of the issue. This approach is more in-depth and strategic, often requiring a comprehensive analysis of the system, its processes, and other underlying factors.

Utilizing both actions simultaneously allows for a well-rounded and robust problem-solving strategy. Not only does it provide immediate relief, but it also reduces the risk of future occurrences of the problem. As a result, it’s a highly effective approach to complex problem-solving, offering both immediate and long-term benefits.

It’s also worth noting that the application of the Unicist Binary Actions isn’t confined to just problem-solving. It can be used in a wide array of management tasks, including strategic planning, risk management, innovation management, change management, etc. By providing a structured and logical method of addressing challenges, it enhances overall organizational effectiveness and efficiency.

The Unicist Research Institute

Unicist Root Cause Management is Needed to Design the Unified Field of Business Functions in Adaptive Environments

 in Unicist Corporate University  tagged Diego Belohlavek / Peter Belohlavek / The Unicist Research Institute / Unicist Standard by

The unicist approach to the root causes of problems was developed to solve problems that have significant consequences in a business. It is based on accessing the unicist functionalist principles of solutions. It uses a logical approach that simplifies the management of root causes and reduces the time and costs needed to find them by up to 70%.

The unicist logical approach to businesses and their processes allowed for managing their root causes. This logic made businesses reasonable, understandable, predictable, and manageable. This logic made the development of unicist root cause management possible, providing a methodology that enables the identification and resolution of the root causes of problems.

The unicist approach to root cause management is based on the understanding that problems are caused by the dysfunctionality of the underlying concepts that define the entity or action. This approach focuses on understanding the causality of problems, including the validity of knowledge, in order to build effective and sustainable solutions.

The methodology consists of three main steps:

  • Triggering causes: These are the operational causes that generate a problem. They are identified by analyzing the actions that are generating the problem and comparing them with the actions that should be taken.
  • Necessary causes: These are the root causes of the problem. They are identified by analyzing the functionality of the underlying concepts that define the entity or action. This analysis focuses on understanding the fundamental causes of the dysfunctionality and finding the necessary threshold to ensure the critical mass of the system.
  • Limit causes: These are the boundaries of what is possible to achieve. They are defined by the wide context and the restricted context of the problem. The wide context cannot be changed, so it strongly influences the definition of the limit causes. The restricted context provides the catalyst to deal with root causes and establishes limit causes when its influence is dysfunctional.

The unicist approach to root cause management goes beyond the traditional problem-solving methods by addressing the underlying causes of problems rather than just dealing with the symptoms. This leads to the development of structural solutions that prevent the recurrence of problems.

By understanding the root causes of problems and developing structural solutions, businesses can achieve greater efficiency and effectiveness in their operations. They can also anticipate and prevent potential problems, leading to a more sustainable and successful business.

Addressing root causes requires the use of binary actions based on functionalist principles. The binary actions are synchronized actions that work together to address the root causes of a problem.

In the context of root cause management, binary actions are used to identify and resolve the underlying dysfunctions that are causing the problem. These actions are designed to open possibilities and ensure the achievement of results.

The first binary action is focused on understanding and addressing the triggering causes of the problem. This involves analyzing the operational causes that are generating the problem and comparing them with the actions that should be taken. By identifying and addressing these triggering causes, it becomes possible to mitigate or eliminate the immediate symptoms of the problem.

The second binary action is aimed at identifying and addressing the necessary causes of the problem. These are the root causes that are driving the dysfunctionality of the underlying concepts or processes. By analyzing the functionality of these concepts and processes, it becomes possible to understand the fundamental causes of the problem and develop effective solutions.

By applying these binary actions, it is possible to develop structural solutions that prevent the recurrence of the problem. The first action focuses on addressing the immediate symptoms, while the second action focuses on resolving the root causes. This integrated approach ensures a comprehensive and long-lasting solution to the problem.

The use of binary actions based on functionalist principles allows for a logical and systematic approach to root cause management. It simplifies the process of identifying and resolving root causes, leading to significant time and cost savings. Additionally, it promotes a deeper understanding of the underlying dynamics of the problem, enabling the development of more effective and sustainable solutions.

The Unicist Research Institute

Intelligence of an ancient windmill to produce flour

 in Unicist Corporate University by


A windmill is a machine that, by obtaining energy from the wind, crushes grains in order to turn them into flour.

Windmill

Its purpose is to reduce the grains to powder, in other words, to turn them into flour.

Its active function is based on capturing wind energy (eolic energy) using blades and converting it into mechanical energy.

Its energy conservation function involves using mechanical energy to generate friction between two stones and crush the grains into flour.

The binary actions of the process are, on the one hand, the use of wind energy to produce mechanical energy and, on the other hand, the application of mechanical energy to grind the grains between two rotating stones.

Diego Belohlavek

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute (TURI) is a world leader in its segment. It introduced the Unicist Functionalist Approach and the use of binary actions to build business solutions. https://www.unicist.org/pdf/wp-unicist-functional-approach.pdf

The “Roots” of Unicist Root Cause Management

 in Unicist Cobots / Unicist Corporate University  tagged Problem Causality / Root Cause Management by

The use of recurring palliatives in problem solving, when the root causes of problems are unknown, demonstrated to be a fallacious shortcut, frequently used for conjunctural solution building, that produces paradoxical results.

Problem Causality

Unicist Root Cause Management introduced an approach for problem solving, facing the management of root causes and avoiding the use of shortcuts used as palliatives, to develop structural solutions.

From Aristotle, Kant, Hegel, Russell and others, in the philosophical field, to the empirical approach of Dr. Ishikawa in the industrial field, the problem of causality was faced trying to find the validity of the causality of things, on the one hand, and introducing the fundamentals of processes on the other hand.

Unicist Root Cause Management introduced an approach to develop structural solutions for problems in adaptive environments. It drives to research the fundamentals of efficacy and efficiency and find a solution that integrates the problems, their restricted context and their wide context.

This approach showed that structural problem solving is the most energy saving action because it hinders the reappearance of problems. It requires apprehending the root causes of problems, working within the boundaries established by the limit causes and ends with a structural solution based on the functionality of the fundamentals of the problem and an operational solution that ensures results.

Unicist Press Committee

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute has been, since 1976, the pioneer in complexity science research to deal with adaptive entities and became a private global decentralized leading research organization in the field of adaptive systems and environments. It was one of the precursors of the Industry 4.0 concept

Unicist Organizational Design using Root Cause Management

 in Unicist Cobots / Unicist Corporate University  tagged Business Objects Building / Object Driven Organization / Organizational Design / Organizational Strategy / Root Cause Management / Unicist Evolutionary Approach by

Since human actions are driven by the concepts people have, it is necessary to organize business roles ensuring that the concepts that underlie business functions are compatible with the concepts of those who assume the responsibility of these roles.

The unicist organizational design approach transforms the business architecture into business processes that include objects to save energy and increase results. The unicist object driven organization is the natural way to design based on the knowledge of the concepts of the functions of a business.

This approach uses the Unicist Object Driven Organization and Client Centered Management models to define, organize and optimize processes that satisfy the needs of the market, the stakeholders and the shareholders.

It implies integrating business objects in the business processes that allow managing the adaptive aspects of businesses, accelerating the business processes while saving energy. The unicist organizational design includes:

The Organizational Strategy: to organize the processes to satisfy clients, shareholders and stakeholders organizing the efficacy and efficiency of business processes.

Business Objects Building: to define the different types of business objects to be installed in business processes: drivers, catalysts, inhibitors, entropy-inhibitors and gravitational objects.

Quality Assurance System: to define the different automated and non-automated quality assurance systems to ensure the reliability of business processes.

Conceptual Design Groups: to design business processes based on their concepts and the technologies and resources that are available.

Unicist Press Committee

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute (TURI) has been, since 1976, the pioneer in the research of complexity where the roots of evolution and the structure of concepts were discovered. In the business world, TURI developed a Solution Bank based on the structures of concepts, which define the nature of business functions that allow managing the root causes of problems and the root drivers of solutions.
https://www.unicist.net/engineering/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/turi.pdf

The Power of Unicist Object Driven Continuous Improvement

 in Unicist Cobots / Unicist Corporate University / Unicist Functional Design  tagged Conceptual design / Innovation management / Intelligent Systems / Object Driven Organization / Ontogenetic Maps / Peter Belohlavek / Process design / The Unicist Research Institute / Unicist Business Architecture / Unicist Change Management Technology / Unicist Confederation / Unicist Evolutionary Approach / Unicist Object Driven Continuous Improvement / Unicist Quality Assurance / Unicist Standard by

The purpose of continuous improvement is to increase effectiveness.

Unicist Continuous Improvement1The active principle that sustains the maximal strategy is driven by innovation and the energy conservation principle that sustains the minimum strategy is based on quality assurance.

Unicist continuous improvement integrates innovation to improve the processes and objects that are being used to implement medium and /or big changes, using quality assurance, the client centered management model and the personalized organization model to ensure the achievement of a higher level of effectiveness.

Maximal strategies are driven by innovation. They are put into action by the implementation of big changes that go beyond the existing boundaries of the present operation and are sustained by the external need represented by the client centered management.

Minimum strategies are driven by quality assurance, put into action by the development and implementation of medium changes and sustained by the personalized organization that ensures an effective participative action model.

The operational aspects of this unicist continuous improvement process can be defined as:

1) Internal Project Managers

There have to be internal project managers who participate in a learning program to deal with a unicist strategic approach to change and continuous improvement.

2) Unicist Change Management Technology

The unicist change management technology has specific objects, procedures and methods to be used to manage change.

3) External Quality Assurance

Quality assurance is a core aspect that needs to be provided externally in order to avoid paradoxical results when introducing changes. The quality assurance process includes both object driven quality assurance and personal control of objects and processes.

4) Objects as drivers, entropy inhibitors and catalysts of change

The unicist approach is based on the use of objects to drive change, inhibit the loss of energy and catalyze the speed of the change. The shorter the transition is, the better the results.

5) Unicist Continuous Improvement Technology

The unicist continuous improvement technology described in the following synthesis allows the development of changes considering the introduction of “changes without changing” based on a participative way to introduce them changing results without changing the real nature of the object/process to be changed.

Conclusions

Big changes have to be considered as necessary changes in order to be communicated internally. They need to be managed integrating the technologies of analytical and fundamental analysis to define the problems.

They need to be sustained by continuous improvement actions and an object driven organization to ensure that the outcome of this change is an effective structured solution and not only a conjunctural subjective approach to solve an extreme need.

Diego Belohlavek

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute was the pioneer in complexity science research and became a private global decentralized leading research organization in the field of human adaptive systems. http://www.unicist.org

Innovative Products Designed as Unicist Business Objects

 in Unicist Cobots / Unicist Corporate University / Unicist Functional Design  tagged Business Objects / Continuous improvement / Diego Belohlavek / Innovation management / Object Driven Organization / Peter Belohlavek / Process design / The Unicist Research Institute / Unicist Confederation / Unicist Corporate University / Unicist Evolutionary Approach by

Innovative products or services need to be designed and managed as unicist business objects in order to avoid their marginalization in the market.

Innovations require having a market position that demonstrates their capacity for generating a superior ROI than the one that is being achieved with succedaneum solutions.

In this case ROI implies, besides a meaningful relationship between investments and income, the existence of collateral benefits.

There is a generalized belief that innovations produce negative side effects. That is why innovations need to be designed to generate evident collateral benefits in order to be desirable.

The improvements of innovations need to include necessarily results, process and systemic improvements. This requires being fully aware of how an innovation is used. Sometimes it might become necessary to build additional objects to complement the use of innovations in order to ensure their functionality.

The quality assurance of an innovation is given by its objective value which is defined by the reference, cost and opportunity values.

The speed of introduction of innovations is multiplied when it has been designed as a business object. If this is not the case the products need to be redesigned or complemented in order to work and be perceived as objects.

Diego Belohlavek

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute was the pioneer in using the unicist logical approach in complexity science research and became a private global decentralized leading research organization in the field of human adaptive systems. It has an academic arm and a business arm.
https://www.unicist.net/engineering/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/turi.pdf

Business Architecture: The Unified Field of Institutions

 in Unicist Cobots / Unicist Corporate University / Unicist Functional Design  tagged Adaptive Systems Design / Business Modeling / Object Driven Organization / Peter Belohlavek / Unicist Approach / Unicist Business Architecture / Unicist Evolutionary Approach / Unified Field of Institutions by

Institutions are considered as entities that seek for permanence, being driven by their mission and the rules that regulate their behavior in the environment. This defines the archetype of an institution that is homologous with the phenotype of a living being.

The institutional phenotype is defined by the natural organization it adopts which is integrated by the structural business model that includes adaptive systems to expand and administrative systems for the energy conservation of the institution.

The energy conservation function defined by the institutional unified field is given by the strategy it has, which includes both the maximal strategy to expand beyond the boundaries and the minimum strategy to survive.

Diego Belohlavek

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute was the pioneer in using the unicist logical approach in complexity science research and became a private global decentralized leading research organization in the field of human adaptive systems. It has an academic arm and a business arm.
https://www.unicist.net/engineering/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/turi.pdf