I’ve been tinkering with improving the graphic presentation of the Zachman Framework. These icons are the first step in that process:
I didn’t expect it, but I had an epiphany regarding the Six Hats, Six Coats concept. Basically I realized the focuses (columns) of the Zachman framework do not necessarily have to be within the confines of a computer system. It suddenly became obvious that a media perspective (row) had to be added to the framework to account for non-computer media.
The result is the following diagram:
The implication is a greater flexibility for system specifications.
I’ve been working on understanding where the attributes and constraints are taking me and I today was thinking about motives.
Reality: Freedom of Conscience. Congregation. Conviction. Religion.
Unity: Freedom of Government. Assembly. Election. Candidacy. Vote.
Quality: Freedom of Profession. Incorporation. Commerce. Production. Trade. Service.
Quantity: Freedom of Education. Association. Communication. Speech. Information. Media.
Safety: Freedom of Residence. Family. Posession. Property. Privacy. Mobility.
Remedy: Freedom of Existence. Life. Liberty. Pursuit of Happiness.
For every state a Structured Thinking System entity has, one of these six motives in effect.
A wise man will make more opportunities than he finds.
– Sir Francis Bacon
One of my regular readers has asked me to put Lao-Tzu aside and tighten up my language. Since he is a Director of Emergency Management for a metropolitian area, I can understand his requirement for clarity and brevity. So I will put away my gong and see what I can do regarding what he says. He also asked me if I intend to use this concept and I want to make it clear that I will be the first to use it and I will use it until it works smoothly before putting anyone else at risk.
Another question that has come up is my continual tinkering with the terminology. I am doing so because the semantics are crucial to understanding this concept. I have found so far that wrestling with the terms reveals new layers of the concept I hadn’t seen before. For example, I have to distinguish between induction and deduction using a consistent terminology. This is not always obvious at first and requires several interations of refinement. I also wish to create a set of terms that are easy to remember. For example, I have been attempting to find a six letter word that starts with “RE” and means “trust”. Quite accidentally I came upon the term “REPOSE” and will be incorporating it into the vocabulary.
Anyone who has been following the full thread of this blog has probably discovered one of the underlying conclusions I have reached regarding the variety of Hexads I have created and explored. That conclusion is that the Six Hats, Six Coats Framework is a Cartesian Square. I also believe that the Structured Thinking System Entities are a Cartesian square. And now I am faced with the challenge of using the verb REPORT to create the attributes for the thirty-six Structured Thinking System entities.
Here is the latest version of the Structured Thinking System Entities:
I have already concluded the REPORT verb works with only six attributes:
The RECORD verb is constrained to only six values per attribute:
One of each of these attribute values are captured by the RECORD verb to define a Structured Thinking System entity’s state. The Structured Thinking System relationships define which of the states can be assigned according to the hierarchy.
Be Content with what you have; rejoice in the way things are. When you realize there is nothing lacking, the whole world belongs to you.
At the center of your being you have the answer;
you know who you are and you know what you want.
Out of my work on the Structured Thinking Language I have come to the realization that it is best suited to describe systems based upon its own core principles. Sort of a “it’s turtles all the way down” recursion.
I will systematically go through them and discuss their characteristics starting with Green Coat: Motives.
The MOTIVE column: Verity, Unity, Quality, Quantity, Safety, Entity.
The MOTIVE column is based on Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. Originally, I thought that the hierarchy required an additional level at the bottom to deal with interoceptive and exteroceptive perception, but as I worked with several other hexads I came to conclude that instead, as Maslow came to conclude, it required another level at the top. Maslow called this top level trascendence, but in the context of the other hexads I decided to call it Verity. Verity is defined as “1. the state or quality of being true; accordance with fact or reality and 2. something that is true, as a principle, belief, idea, or statement.” Personally, I consider it as “the desire to right what is wrong.” The next motive is Unity which is defined as “containing all the elements properly belonging”. Maslow uses the fancy term “self-actualization”, but I think a self-actualized person can simply be called an unified person. The third motive is Quality which is defined as “uniqueness and value”. The fourth motive is Quantity “low cost participation”. The fifth motive is Safety which can be defined “freedom from the occurrence or risk of injury, danger, or loss”. The sixth motive is Entity which I define as “existing or being”. One Verity has many Unities; one Unity has many Qualities; one Quality has many Quantities, one Quantity has many Safeties; one Safety has many Relieves and, here’s the clincher, One Relief has many Verities.
I believe we are on an irreversible trend toward more freedom and democracy
– but that could change.
– Dan Quayle
I’ve been playing with writing STL code for a couple of days now and have been working out some major logical issues. Actually trying to write code instead of syntax that is logical has shaken down the Six Hats, Six Coats Framework considerably. Sort of like dismantling and rebuilding a Chevy and then taking it on its first drive through the neighborhood without a muffler.
One of the things I have discovered is that Structured Thinking Language is best for describing Structured Thinking Systems (The Six Hats, Six Coats Framework). So let’s take a look at what I found.
First, we will go over the revised verbs and nouns. Here are the Structured Thinking Verbs:
And Here are the Structured Thinking Nouns:
This gives us our Structured Thinking Framework:
What we have as a result is the meshing of six horizontal hierarchies and six vertical hierarchies.
Next, we create all of the entities. There are six entities per noun.
CREATE CreateName MOTIVE ( Virtue, Unity, Esteem, Accord, Safety, Entity ) PERSON ( Creator, Leader, Patron, Member, Friend, Teller ) OBJECT ( Motive, Person, Object, Method, Locale, Moment ) METHOD ( Create, Relate, Report, Record, Afford, Engage ) LOCALE ( ExtraNet, InterNet, IntraNet, ExtraNode, InterNode, IntraNode ) MOMENT ( Year, Month, Day, Hour, Minute, Second );
Next we relate the entities to one another. The keys are surrogates, so they are not visible. I am building a set of relationships from left to right on each row and a set of relationships top to bottom on each column:
RELATE RelationshipName ( MOTIVE.Virtue TO MOTIVE.Unity, MOTIVE.Unity TO MOTIVE.Esteem, MOTIVE.Esteem TO MOTIVE.Accord, MOTIVE.Accord TO MOTIVE.Safety, MOTIVE.Safety TO MOTIVE.Entity MOTIVE.Mantra TO PERSON.Creator, PERSON.Creator TO OBJECT.Motive, OBJECT.Motive TO METHOD.Create, METHOD.Create TO LOCALE.ExtraNet, LOCALE.ExtraNet TO MOMENT.Year PERSON.Creator TO PERSON.Leader, PERSON.Leader TO PERSON.Patron, PERSON.Patron TO PERSON.Member, PERSON.Member TO PERSON.Friend, PERSON.Friend TO PERSON.Teller, MOTIVE.Unity TO PERSON.Leader, PERSON.Leader TO OBJECT.Person, OBJECT.Person TO METHOD.Relate, METHOD.Relate TO LOCALE.InterNet, ... );
This gives us the following entities composing our Structured Thinking System (STS):
As you can see, the order of the columns have been changed. You can also see that I have changed the color coding of the hats and coats to better reflect common usage in the industry (ie. Black Hat = Secure). I also think I am coming more into line with de Bono, but the jury is still out on that one.
Another issue raised in making the relationships is they are one to many as they proceed left to right across the rows and one to many as they proceed down the columns. There is no compromise to this if the system is to work at peak effectiveness.
There is no need for normalization or denormalization as the structure is fully normalized. There is also no need for attributes because they are identical for every entity:
I am at a turning point here. I have to go deeper into the model to determine how to create attributes. Which I have not yet attempted. I have to save it for later posts.
Now we can create our reports. This is an alternate function of the six verbs that occurred to me. Note that the selected cells are all adjacent to one another either horizontally or vertically and flow from left to right; top to bottom:
REPORT ReportName ( MOTIVE.Esteem, MOTIVE.Accord, PERSON.Member, OBJECT.Method, METHOD.Record, METHOD.Afford, LOCALE.IntraNode, MOMENT.Minute );
Giving us the following Report:
If you want to throw in some filters it is easy:
REPORT ReportName ( MOTIVE.Esteem, MOTIVE.Accord, PERSON.Member = John Doe, OBJECT.Method, METHOD.Record, METHOD.Afford, LOCALE.IntraNode, MOMENT.Minute = 30 );
The “30” aggregates to every 30 minutes.
Now we can plan our data capture. Again an alternate use for the RECORD verb. Again the cells for capture are all adjacent to the left or down:
RECORD RecordName ( MOTIVE.Esteem, PERSON.Patron, PERSON.Member, OBJECT.Method );
This would create the following form:
Here we set up the affordances for the entities:
AFFORD AffordName RECORD.RecordName TO PERSON.Member;
Finally, we execute the RECORD Script and as the Member isn’t given the Member must log in:
ENGAGE EngageName ( RECORD.RecordName AND PERSON.Member );
The code I have created here is a radical departure from the syntax releases I have come out with so far as I realized what the design was leading me to create. And that is the clincher. The design brought itself out. I have just been trying to follow it along.
What I am finding is there are not four verbs–Select, Insert, Update, Delete–but six–create, relate, report, record, afford and engage!