Monthly Archives: November 2015


The Era of Participation at the Unicist Confederation

Building Solutions is an R&D Process

The Unicist Confederation is a technology provider that delivers solutions. The great difference between providing a solution or solving a problem is the responsibility an individual needs to assume and the knowledge that is needed.

The boundaries for solutions are always open, while the boundaries for problem solving are always limited by the problem. That is why people who build solutions need to have the concept of the solutions, while people who solve problems only need to know the systemic structure of the problem. Solving problems is easier than building solutions.

The Era of Participation

The Unicist Ontology of Language

Conceptual managemet requires using factual, synthetic, ambiguous and figurative languages.

We are now at the beginning of the Era of Participation, which implies that all organizations need to work as a strong participative environment in order to establish a culture that allows working as an institution.

Those who do not do this, are just transitory groups of people who join because of materialistic interests without having anything in common. Access:
http://www.unicistinstitute.net/future-research/future-research-the-era-of-participation-is-changing-the-habits/

The lack of participation unavoidably drives towards “Active Inaction”. Access:
http://unicist.org/talents/active-inaction-destroys-relationships-and-businesses/

The Context of the Participation:

Managing the Concepts of the Solutions

It is important to take into account that the traditional educational system, in order to socialize, promotes the use of analytical and operational languages and the idea that knowing is having answers.

But languages are the code needed to develop conscious thinking processes. Thus, while the traditional educational approach fosters operational and analytical thinking, this approach also inhibits conceptual thinking.

Emulating concepts in mind requires the use of factual, synthetic, ambiguous and figurative languages. One needs to have questions, not answers, to build conceptual knowledge. The paradox is that transforming straightforward language into a standard implies condemning people to stay at an operational-analytical level hindering the assumption of responsibilities.

The Framework for Participation

As it is known, we are at the leading edge of science and technology in the field of complex adaptive systems, which requires a very special kind of participation. For this reason, all our Partners and Associates need to participate in the R&D processes, by developing solutions with clients using the unicist technologies. This implies sharing the intellectual property of these solutions with the client and with our organization. Belonging implies sharing.

These projects are managed by think tanks, which are integrated by members of the clients, by the partners/associates and by the members of the Unicist Corporate University. As it was said, the Intellectual Property is shared by all the participants, and the essays, that are written on the conclusions of the researches, are open to the community (not the solutions for the clients).

These R&D activities are integrated with the learning programs of the partners; they are therefore provided free of charge to the clients who have been approached by the partners. The programs are developed with the support of the Unicist Conceptual Design System.

The coordination of all R&D projects at The Unicist Research Institute is Peter Belohlavek’s responsibility.

We invite you to participate. You will find the access to this participation space at: http://peterbelohlavek.net/research/about/

Unicist Executive Committee

Share

Essay Submission: Confirmation of expertise of Associates

Dear colleagues:

The Unicist Confederation manages a “knowledge business”. Knowledge businesses are such because they provide reliable solutions. A paradigmatic knowledge business is medicine.

Quality Assurance

Quality assurance is the core function to avoid malpractice problems that endanger the achievement of results. Technical-analytical and conceptual knowledge are the core of success.

This implies that physicians have the responsibility for having the updated knowledge of what they do. A physician, who aspires to become a professor, studies more than one hour daily. Their authoritative role is sustained by the credits they obtained by participating in conferences and other essentially analogous activities.

“Malpractice trials” are an entropy inhibitor that fosters their learning activities. Our Ethics Committee is homologous to the malpractice trials.

The activity of our associates also belongs to the world of the “knowledge businesses”. And in this case the activity of our associates belongs to a special case where the nature of things is being managed to ensure the generation of results.

Learn about the inner time required:
http://www.unicist.net/partner-news/unicist-ontology-of-the-internal-speed-for-decision-making/

We cannot imagine that this activity demands less than 3 hours of weekly studies just to be updated with the latest hard technologies that allow transforming concepts into operational solutions. The advantage is that the benefits are according to the solutions delivered and do not depend on the professional time consumed.

This implies that their authoritative role needs to be sustained by the “essays”, based on real cases, they have developed. These essays will be published as a book in order to confirm their authoritative role.

Therefore if you have not presented your essay, please do it as soon as possible in order to enable your participation in unicist projects. These essays include the technical-analytical aspects and the concepts and fundamentals of a specific field of action.

See the invitation to participate at:
http://www.unicist.net/partner-news/call-for-submission-of-essays-launching-6-30-2016/

If you need more information please contact Diana Belohlavek.

Unicist Executive Committee

Share

Unicist Ontology of the Internal Speed for Decision Making

Decisions have been made when they have been implemented. Before their implementation they are just hypothetical wishes.

Concepts can be apprehended by anyone, whatever the level of thinking an individual has. What varies is the time needed to apprehend them. This apprehension requires having an high level of focusing capacity which depends on the ethical intelligence of the person. Therefore, in real life, there are no excuses for not having the actual concept of what one is doing.

The speed of decision making depends on the type of logical thinking of individuals. It has to be considered that speed is defined by the chronological lap between a new fact and the implemented real action to exert accurate influence.

The more evolved the logical thinking of individuals the higher the speed of action:

1) Analogical thinking drives to no decisions because personal needs and beliefs prevail. The speed is “0” (zero)

2) Operational thinking requires making the necessary technical analytical studies to define the problem and the possible solution. This is considered the standard time for decision making.

3) Analytical thinking allows focusing the operational technical analytical studies. This doubles the speed of operational thinking.

4) Systemic (Scientific) thinking focuses on a specific operation which reduces the cost of the preparation of decision making based on the existence of a hypothesis for a solution. This doubles the speed of analytical thinking.

5) Conceptual thinking provides the ontological structure that underlies the operation. It allows defining the essential drivers of the solution. This doubles the speed of systemic thinking.

6) Unicist thinking provides the understanding of the boundaries of the solution allowing the development of a plan B (including an entropy inhibitor) and a plan C (including a catalyst). This doubles the speed of conceptual thinking.

Conclusion

Internal speed cannot be accelerated without producing paradoxical results. Internal speed evolves with the individual but a sudden acceleration drives individuals towards analogical thinking.

It has to be considered that the mass of the population tends to use analogical thinking at work. Teamwork decisions need to accept that a train has the speed of its slowest wagon (metaphor).

The above mentioned speeds have been empirically confirmed.

Peter Belohlavek

Share