The Unicist Paradigm Shift in Sciences applied to Businesses

Print Friendly

Integrating Observable Facts with the Nature of Things

The unicist paradigm shift in sciences drove from an empirical approach to a pragmatic, structuralist and functionalist approach to deal with complex environments, integrating observable facts with the “nature of things”. It made businesses reasonable, understandable and predictable. It allowed managing the world of possibilities going beyond probabilities.

The Unicist Paradigm Shift

Access The Unicist Paradigm Shift in Sciences

The Unicist Theory allowed understanding and influencing the evolution of living beings and artificial complex adaptive systems.

This influence is exerted by using unicist logic based and object driven technologies, which is now a worldwide trend.

Some of the companies that use objects are: Airbus, Amazon, Apple, BBC, Boeing, Dassault Systemes, Dupont, Ericsson, Facebook, General Electric, Google, Hilton, Honda, Hyundai, LinkedIn, Lufthansa, Mapfre, Mayo Clinic, Michelin, Novartis, Open Text, P&G, Pfizer, SAP, Siemens, Tata Motors, Toyota, Unilever, Walmart, Walt Disney World and Youtube.

You can learn about the Unicist Object Driven Technologies developed at:
http://www.unicist.org/repo

Learn more about the unicist paradigm shift in sciences at:
https://www.unicist.net/management/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/unicist-paradigm-shift.pdf

The Unicist Research Institute

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/management/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/turi.pdf

FacebookTwitterLinkedInGoogle+Share

Mass Groups to Research the Evolution of Customers’ Behavior

Print Friendly

The evolution of customers’ behavior needs to be measured in their automatic behavior when dealing with the environment. This automatism is driven by the preconcepts individuals have and the myths they believe in.

Unicist Mss GroupsThe use of mass groups is a technology to discover the myths and preconcepts installed in the collective unconscious of a society, a social group, an institution or a market segment.

These preconcepts are installed in the long-term memory of individuals and drive their spontaneous actions.

These groups foster the emulation of massive behavior by introducing stimuli in an extremely heterogeneous group that drive them to actions that are fully based on intuition and instincts without rational control.

These groups need to act in a free environment to generate an interpretation of the stimuli that is materialized in actions and not in words. These actions have to be driven by the automatic responses of the participants of the group ensuring that the results of the actions arise from the collective unconscious.

There are different types of action that allow generating a mass phenomenon.

  • Collage building
  • Participating in a party
  • Eating or drinking
  • Dancing
  • Fighting
  • Playing

These actions allow accessing the hidden aspects of human behavior and allow interpreting and understanding the collective unconscious.

The functionality of a mass group can be achieved when the stimuli really drive the group to achieve a level of excitation that makes the participants lose rational control of their actions.

They have to be organized in a space that allows liberating emotional and instinctive behavior. There can be no signs or symbols that might trigger the superego of the participants.

Anomie is a basic condition for the mass group functionality. The participants need to feel that their actions cannot be controlled.

The coordination of mass groups

Mass group leaders require being able to contact their own most basic feelings in order to lead the group, preaching by example, towards a chaotic environment. The use of written language has to be avoided and the use of verbal language has to be minimized and only the use of syncretic language is acceptable.

After the experience has been finished it is necessary to interpret the meaning of the actions. The participation of a group in the interpretation of its own actions is the most effective way to understand the collective unconscious.

These interpretations need to be extremely basic without using psychological or anthropological language. They are based on establishing “the nouns” (purposes) that drive the unconscious actions. When the group participates in its own interpretation the leader who led the group needs to be replaced by a new leader.

Validation of the conclusions

Destructive pilot tests need to be done to confirm the validity of the conclusions. This requires using the conclusions to develop commercial actions in the segments to confirm their functionality.

When this has been achieved the actions need to be extended to adjacent segments until the actions become dysfunctional. This allows establishing the validity of the knowledge and the limits of its application.

Peter 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/management/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/turi.pdf


Unicist Ontological Segmentation of B2B Knowledge Providers

Print Friendly

The objective of developing the unicist ontology of B2B Knowledge Providers was to provide companies with the necessary information to decide which type of consultant is necessary and functional. We include in this definition R&D organizations, business training enterprises and consultants that are organized as businesses and the internal consulting organizations of large companies.

B2B Knowledge ProvidersIt has to be considered that the purpose of knowledge providers is to expand the value generation of a company. It can be said that business consultants are frequently used for other purposes, which is true.

But the concept of a knowledge provider is to expand the value that is being generated. This implies that if the provider was not there, the results would be inferior.

The maximal strategy of knowledge providing is to expand the boundaries of businesses in order to make them growth, while the minimum strategy is to provide support to solve the problems that need to be eliminated to foster value generation.

There are five levels of knowledge providing roles. Three of them are focused on the minimum strategy and two of them on the maximal strategy to expand boundaries.

These roles are:

  1. Solopreneurs
  2. Support Service Providers
  3. Knowledge Providers
  4. Expertise Providers
  5. Solution Providers

Level 1) Solopreneurs

Solopreneurs are functional to deal with specific problems that can be outsourced. They work basically in a specific field where they have the necessary empirical and analytical knowledge to solve problems.

Their success depends on the personal relationship they establish with their clients. Typical cases of solopreneuring are academics who establish relationships based on their teaching activity and have an authoritative role in their field.

They move to a superior level, building a firm, when they decide to establish a client base that allows them to have a stable business and not only conjunctural contracts.

Level 2) Support Service Providers

These are basically small companies that provide hygienic services for large companies or work as catalysts of internal problem solving processes for all types of companies.

Segmentation of B2B Knowledge ProvidersThey work with universally accepted methods or technologies to deal with operational and technical problems.

The core of their success is based on the personal relationships they establish with their clients and the conflict avoidance in their work. Therefore, they only deal with conservative solutions that do not change the status quo of the organizations.

They have no R&D to develop proprietary technologies although they frequently mention that they have “unique methods”. Therefore, they have no brand, which requires on their behalf the use of a universally accepted technology.

Their brand is given by the names of their leaders. Typical services of this level are traditional legal services, auditors, change management implementers, strategy implementers, human resources advisors, IT providers, etc.

They move to a superior level when they decide that they do not want to depend on the next conjunctural problem to work as support services providers. This is a low price segment.

Level 3) Knowledge Providers

This level includes the preceding level of Support Service Providers. These Knowledge Providers are small or medium size companies that provide operational and analytical knowledge to their clients. This knowledge is necessarily associated with the requirements of the client organization.

Typical services are training services in all the operational analytical fields the members of a company need to manage. They are successful when they have concrete specialization fields that make them be perceived as having an authoritative role in the market.

They use universally accepted technical solutions and their specialization field is to make them accessible to the members of an organization. They tend to be integrated with support services to cover the needs of implementation of the company. Their brand is fully dependant on the specialty of their manpower.

They have no R&D to develop proprietary technologies although many of them have a specific way to implement their services. They provide conservative solutions while they tend to mention that they are on the leading edge.

They compete with the market and with internal knowledge transfer processes. Their success is based on the establishment of strong personal relationships with their clients and with the members of their organizations.

They move to a superior level when they decide to migrate to a “specialization market” because their market is becoming a commodity one.

Level 4) Expertise Providers

This level includes the preceding level of Knowledge Providers. The Expertise Providers are small, medium or large companies that provide specialized expertise to their clients. Typical services of this segment are specialized law firms, expert business consulting firms, expert technology firms, etc.

These organizations have R&D processes to develop solutions to systemic unsolved problems and develop proprietary technologies that are partially opened to the market to build the image of their organization.

They might work as boutiques or as organized institutional firms. When they work as boutiques their brand is fully associated to the brand of their experts and when they work as large consulting firms their brand is institution driven (Booz Allen, McKinsey, etc).

Their success is based on the functionality of the expertise they provide. To expand markets they use the reliability of their solutions, which is materialized in their brand attributes.

The reliability of their solutions includes the inclusion of highly qualified people to provide the solutions to the end clients. They compete with equivalent companies in the market and only have internal competitors within the client organization when they have no leading edge solutions. This is a high value – high price segment.

They move to a superior level when they decide to include final branded solutions in order to expand the market.

Level 5) Solution Providers

This level includes the preceding level of Expertise Providers. Solution Providers are small, medium or large companies that provide specialized solution to their clients.

These companies are fully focused on R&D to develop solutions for specific problems in specific markets (for example: SRI). There are basically two types of solutions providers: Those who provide tools and those who provide business objects.

The tool provider develops new technologies that sustain solutions to unsolved problems that allow companies to go beyond the boundaries of an activity. The business objects provider develops technologies based on the nature of the business processes, which requires managing the concepts of their functions.

These objects providers generate simple solutions that can only be accepted by organizations that need to deal with the nature of processes. This is only necessary when the systemic solutions do not suffice to expand businesses.

Typical cases of this segment are the providers of adaptive automation tools, objects for business organization, objects for market growth, objects for business strategy, etc.

These companies need to have an institutional brand in order to be accepted. The success of their solutions is necessarily measured by results. They have no competition when a company decided to expand a market and is having problems to achieve it.

Companies do not buy solutions when they are in a comfort zone. Superior education in companies is the core aspect in the expansion of these companies.  This is a high value – high price segment.

Peter 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/management/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/turi.pdf


The Unicist Ontogenetic Map of Negotiations

Print Friendly

Negotiations are the actions where the diplomatic power is transformed into concrete value. A negotiation is a process where synergy between parts is achieved finding the complementation and the space where non-conflictive relations are possible.

To deal with the nature of negotiations it is necessary to clarify the nature of conflicts that underlies.

It can be said that there are four basic conflicts between humans:

Evolution conflicts: These are complementation conflicts that result from the mutual difference between the parts.

Involution conflicts: These are the conflicts that result from the supplementation of the colliding strengths between the parts.

Authority conflicts: They result from the need of the parts to prevail in some field.

Absence of conflict: This is the consequence of needing to avoid conflicts because their consequences cannot be faced.

Therefore there are different types of negotiations that are the consequence of the types of conflicts prevailing and how they are solved. The particular characteristic of the negotiation process is that while the individual negotiations that integrate this process are taxonomically driven, each one of them works as a unit.

We invite you to be our guest at the Unicist Library to access the collection of books on Unicist Business Architecture: http://www.unicist.com

Diana 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.
https://www.unicist.net/management/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/turi1.pdf


The Unicist Fishbone Method to Find Root Causes

Print Friendly

The Unicist Fishbone Method (UFM) is based on the original Fishbone developed by Kaoru Ishikawa. Conceptually, what Ishikawa developed was a method to manage the fundamentals of industrial processes.

Unicist Fishbone

The Ishikawa method was developed to allow people, who participated in the work processes, to develop their improvements.

Both the original Ishikawa method and the unicist fishbone method require that people have real experience in the field that is being analyzed.

The UFM was developed using the fundamentals of the operational concept of a business function and developing a fishbone approach in order to find the root causes that drive the functionality.

For example, we can consider the fundamentals of a project design process to find the root causes of the problems that allow improving such process.

Unicist FishboneThe fundamentals to be considered are: the value generation architecture, the conceptual design of the system, the conceptual design of the objects included in the system, the objects architecture, the quality assurance and the risk management.

These fundamentals need to be dimensioned in measurable entities. This implies that, although fundamentals work as fuzzy sets, their functional level needs to be dimensioned in order to define their influence on the functionality of a process.

Then they are organized as a fishbone diagram to allow the participants of a group to define the triggering and the root causes that need to be considered to improve processes.

The Unicist Fishbone Method includes the methodology to be used to find the root causes of the problems that allow improving processes.

To learn more, access a booklet on Unicist Continuous Improvement at:
http://www.unicist.org/repo/#Business

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/management/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/turi.pdf


Discovery of the Unicist Ontology of Brand/Image Building

Print Friendly

The discovery of the Unicist Ontology of Brand Building defined the nature of the functionality of the building of a Critical Mass, a Promise and a Prove of Credibility in the evolution of brands.

Unicist Brand BuildingA “Brand” was defined as the materialization of the image of a living being or an unanimated entity. The brand is installed in mind as an iconic symbol that can be a name, term, design, symbol, or any other feature that identifies the entity.

Brands work when they are installed in the long term memory of an individual which produces an automated recall of attributes when the iconic symbol of the brand is perceived.

Brands are paradigmatic ambiguous semiotic signs which have two integrated meanings that need to be within their attributes. Iconic symbols are the guiding signs that drive towards the perception of the attributes of a brand.

On the one hand, a brand implies a promise of something that is going to happen, and on the other hand, it includes a “prove of credibility” that makes the promise believable.

The brand identifies the role of an entity. That is why brands are necessarily functional and their functionality is limited to the role of the entity.

The purpose of a brand is to generate a critical mass to influence people in order to install a preconceived perception in their memory. That is why brands work as catalysts or inhibitors of actions.

Diana 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/management/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/turi.pdf


Personal Strategies: from heroic to conquering actions

Print Friendly

Personal strategies begin with heroic actions to find a place in the world but achieve their maturity when conquering actions become possible to expand the boundaries of one’s activities.

Strategic ActionStrategic actions seek to influence the environment actively. The action principle is given by the maximal strategy that is based on the opportunities offered by the environment. The minimum strategy, depending solely on the influencer’s action, is its energy conservation principle.

There are four ontological segments to develop strategic actions: Heroic Strategy, Defensive Strategy, Dominant Strategy and Conquering Strategy.

Level 1 – Heroic Strategy

The heroic strategy is performed by those who develop strategies based on individual heroic actions.

They are basically subjectivists who consider that individual efforts and smartness can prevail over systematically planned actions.

Heroic strategies are based on the personal costs individuals or members of a group are willing to pay.

Such individuals confront problems as personal challenges.

Level 2 – Defensive Strategy

The Defensive Strategy is performed by those who master the situations in which competitors attack.

These individuals are extremely smart when it is necessary to create alternatives to weaken others’ arguments.

They are usually very good analysts and utopists. Their ideas prevail over action.

They use their opponent’s forces to attack the implicit weaknesses of their strengths.

Level 3 – Dominant Strategy

The dominant strategy is performed naturally by those who are secure strategists and feel the need of taking the opportunities of the environment.

They are extremely good at diagnosing, and are able to picture the unified field of a business strategy without considering their personal interest.

They are strict ethical managers.

They are never satisfied. They always feel hunger for new expansive actions.

Level 4 – Conquering Strategy

This strategy is developed by those whose personal driver is conquering new positions.

They are natural doers with a strong intuition to perceive reality and its needs.

Conquerors are smart organizers. They usually lead their conquering campaigns personally.

Innovations and the creation of new paradigms are their natural tools to conquer new fields.

Speed based strategies and an endless energy reservoir are their raw material to adapt to the environment.

Conclusion

Action-reflection-action is the natural process to upgrade the level of a strategy. It requires learning through the actions in the environment, making the necessary mistakes, but avoiding their repetition. Good luck…

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/management/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/turi.pdf


The Introduction to avoid Building a Butterfly Company

Print Friendly

Butterfly companies are unstable organizations that are unable to work as institutions. They might be the consequence of an unstable market or the need of the owners to avoid the separation between them and the company.

When they are based on unstable markets there might be two different situations:

1)      It is the natural consequence of the market, for example unique projects.

2)      It is the consequence of the market instability of a country or region.

In the first case there is no butterfly company, just a transitory business that doesn’t pretend to work as an institution.

In the second case there is a butterfly company that tends to disappear when the conjuncture changes. The permanent threat of the market hinders the separation of the company from its owner so the company cannot evolve but based on the owner’s actions.

Archetypical butterfly companies are those working in stable markets but not separated from their owners.

Their purpose is to obtain profit at any price having the necessary conjunctural justifications to obtain it and exerting the necessary power to ensure it.

Diana Belohlavek

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


Cooperation Building is a Key Driver for Value Generation

Print Friendly

Cooperation is defined as the building of a common space of complementation in which the expansion of the boundaries of the participants becomes possible, while the individual limits of the members are respected.

The driver of cooperation building is the need to generate additional value. This requires an extreme focus on the results that need to be produced, using an integrative logic to integrate the needs of the participants and the external goals to be achieved.

Therefore, the generation of additional added value is part of the nature of cooperative environments.

Cooperation is based on human gregarious instinct and is natural between groups of people who have decided to expand their boundaries.

It is easily observable in the cooperation of countries and organizations of any kind. It adopts many shapes: collaboration, alliances, federations, confederations, etc.

Cooperation is not feasible in extreme individualistic or involving environments. In these environments competitiveness becomes extreme and cooperation is seen as a weakness.

This is a paradox that condemns these types of environments to live in a stagnated context with endless conflicts and/or conflict avoidance actions.

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. http://www.unicist.org/repo/index.php#Unicist


Discovery of the Ontogenetic Structure of Leadership

Print Friendly

The unicist ontogenetic structure of leadership describes the nature of leadership in order to be able to use the adequate leadership for any situation. Understanding the nature of leadership is basic to find the natural place to develop one’s activities. It also helps to understand how to influence people and how to respond to the influence of others.

The basics of leadership

LeadershipLeadership is based on the need to sustain one’s authority. The participation of others is a condition of leadership. A leader is such because s/he is followed.

Therefore, in terms of the unicist logic, participation is the active function of leadership and the energy conservation function is given by the power a leader has to impose her/his authority. But this is a sort of paradox.

The energy conservation function is given by the power the individual “does not use”. If the power is used it consumes energy and, in fact, a double amount of energy, because:

  • To impose something there is a need to exert power and consume energy.
  • When power is exerted, authority is being lost, because it means that the authority of the individual has not been accepted. And in this case, an additional amount of energy must be invested to reconstruct the value of the authoritative role.

Participation poses another paradoxical dilemma:

  • When the authority of the leader is extreme, for example a religious leader, the participation is not possible.
  • When the participation is extreme, there is no possibility to accept an authoritative role.

(*) This development is one of the “100 major unicist discoveries that are changing the world”:
https://www.unicist.net/management/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/100-major-unicist-discoveries.pdf

Unicist Press Committee

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/management/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/turi.pdf