Part of "shape": 6x6 Reference frames

A-1.1 Contents

⚙ AK-1.1.1 Looking forward - paths by seeing directions

A reference frame in mediation innovation

When the image link fails, 🔰 click here.
There is a revert to main topic in a shifting frame.
Contexts:
◎ C-Shape mediation communication
↖ C-Serve technology, models
↗ I-C6isr organisational control
↙ infotypes
↘ techflows

---

Fractal focus in mediation innovation

Combining:

• Systems Thinking (ViSM Viable Systems Model)
• The Zachman 6*6 reference frame principles
• Information processing, the third wave

---

⚙ AK-1.1.2 Local content

Reference	Squad	Abbrevation
AK-1 Basics getting adaptive using the 6*6 reference framework
AK-1.1 Contents	contents	Contents
AK-1.2 Knowledge shoulders for the 6x6 RFW	base6x6_02	Frame-ref
AK-1.3 Adjusting axioms for the 6x6 RFW	base6x6_03	OR Forest
AK-1.4 Basics systems internals 6x6 RFW	base6x6_04	Metrics
AK-1.5 Basics systems externals 6x6 RFW	base6x6_05	DO LSS
AK-1.6 Learning maturity from 6x6 RFW's	base6x6_06	CMM3-4OO
AK-2 Details systems internals 6x6 reference framework
AK-2.1 Evolution: bottom up adaptions for a system	syst6x6_01	O-ALC
AK-2.2 Purpose of creating a safe environment	syst6x6_02	O-ALC
AK-2.3 Resource alignments for the system as a whole	syst6x6_03	Gemba
AK-2.4 Systems value streams components on their own	syst6x6_04	Stations
AK-2.5 Systems choosing their risks in uncertainties	syst6x6_05	DO PDCA
AK-2.6 Learning maturity from Details systems internals	syst6x6_06	CMM4-4OO
AK-3 Details systems externals 6x6 reference framework
AK-3.1 Evolution: bottom up adaptions in the univers	agil6x6_01	101-IS
AK-3.2 Purpose of defending against external threats	agil6x6_02	VM-VMs
AK-3.3 Resource continuity of a system as a whole	agil6x6_03	Ideate-EE
AK-3.4 Systems value streams: components in a universe	agil6x6_04	Plan-EE
AK-3.5 Systems choosing interactions in the universe	agil6x6_05	DO-4OO
AK-3.6 Learning maturity from details systems externals	agil6x6_06	CMM5-4OO

---

⚖ AK-1.1.3 Guide reading this page

The need in methodlogies and practices

This page is about Optimizing. Operations research is the enabler by advising responsible and accountable persons in the organisation. When a holistic approach for organisational missions and organisational improvements is wanted, starting at the technology pillar is sensible. Knowing what is going on on the shop-floor (Gemba).
👁 💡 Working into an approach for optimized business and technology situation, there is a gap in knowledge and tools. The proposal to solve those gaps is "Jabes".

The world of BI and Analytics is challenging. It is not the long-used methodology of producing administrative reports. A lot needs to get solved, it is about shaping change:

1. ⚙ Operational Lean processing, design thinking
2. 📚doing the right things, organisation & public.
3. 🎭help in underpinning decisions boardroom usage.
4. ⚖ Being in control, being compliant in missions.

---

The need in methodlogies and practices

Three Pillars as enterprise instantions Organisations do exist for a long time. It is just recently started to view them in more technical scientific way.
There are several stages:

1. In an standard (repeatable) organisation there are still hierarchical leaders. It was the technology pushing this.
   The organisation powered by technology in a ship like constellation. The engines (data centre) out of sight below visibility.
2. In an industrial approach information processing Serves multiple customers (multi tenancy) for the best performance and the best profits on all layers.
   There are six pillars in a functional and technical layer. A futuristic vision is a positive attitude but can easily become negative when too far from
   reality.
   The three internal lines:
   • Information (Business, Missions Visions, BPM),
   • Technology (Operations SDLC),
   • Communication (Information Analytics),
   Are getting the attention while the hypes are what is happening by changes externally.
   The attention and reactions and hypes are reactive there is a resistance for
   really change in adapting the new possibilities.
   
   
   
3. The attention and reactions and hypes are pro-active predictive there is no resistance for
   really change. Adapting the new possibilities.
   
4. There is an pro-active predictive mindset accepting prescriptive advisories and a vision for enabling disruptive changes.

For the stages four and five a limiting factor is the human in all the loops. Thinking it would all be solved by AI (artificial intelligence) is disconnecting form that limitation. For the
realisations and evaluations the human should be kept in those loops.

---

⚒ AK-1.1.4 Progress

done and currently working on:

• 2025 week 1 - 9
  1. Started to pick up were I left in 2020
  2. SDLC has become technology (draft), BPM organisation with information processing
  3. The nine-plane and SIAR for lean the fundaments for Jabes.
• 2025 week 34
  1. Also 2.1 to 2.6 need to be updated. The twist is that by adding the additional abstraction layer the context gets a duality by abstraction levels.

---

AK-1.2 Knowledge shoulders for the 6x6 RFW

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

---

⟲ AK-1.2.1 Consolidating simplified knowledge

Just limiting six interrogates into three

Start with Why (Simon Sinek, 2009) Sinek says people are inspired by a sense of purpose (or "Why"), and that this should come first when communicating, before "How" and "What"
The difference between architecting (representation) and engineering (specification) is solved by an additional level, six levels instead of the original five. The ordering of "6W 1h" in the horizontal classifications is not aligned for multiple dimensional relationships. That is the part where I will do it a little bit different:

• "Why" as content and "Which" for one of the questions.
• "How and What" Zachman as the last two (what Sinek).
• "Which and When" Zachman as the first two (why Sinek).
• "Where and Who Zachman as the middle two (how Sinek).

Just changing words but not the intention is a recipe for a lot of confusion.

---

Decoupling Zachman reference context abstraction

A more abstracted version is decoupling the limited enterprise architecture context. That decoupling is a root-cause for difficulties in understanding intentions of classifications and relations by transformations. "Enterprise architecture defined" (lucid.com)

Named for its creator, John Zachman, this framework uses a structured matrix as a means to view and categorize an enterprise. The framework consists of a 36-cell matrix, with each cell focusing on a different perspective (such as business owner, planner, designer, and so on).
This matrix gives EA professional insights into the company's assets and how various components of the enterprise are related. This information can help companies be more agile and help to make better decisions.

---

The limited unclear set of Zachman rules

The framework doesn't have a clear set of rules axioma's. Only this:

1. Columns have no order, are interchangeable but cannot be reduced or created
2. Each column has a simple generic model, every column can have its own meta-model
3. The basic model of each column is unique, relationship by objects, structure are unique
4. Each row describes a distinct, unique perspective.
5. Each cell is unique for its intend, content
6. The composite or integration of all cells in one row constitutes a complete model from the perspective of that row.
7. The logic is recursive

This is full of uncertainties and ambiguity.

---

The limited unclear set of Zachman axis

The Zachman 6*6 reference frame has two axis:

• Identification context, Concept, System logic,
  System technology, tools components, operational instance
• Engineering:
  What: Bills of materials, How: functional specs , Where: drawings geometry ,
  Who: Operating instructions , When: Timing diagrams , Why: Design objectives - choices

This is incomplete because there is more by systems than only engineering, another perspective is trading.

---

⟲ AK-1.2.2 About Safety tied to functionality

Safety, Cyber Security axioms

Zero Trust rests on two core axioms:

• “Never trust, always verify.”
• “Assume breach.”

👉🏾 These axioms are not realistic workable when there is no uncertainty of any type in this. It fails in the criterion for defined refutations (K.Popper). The only way out of this dilemma is defining refutation criteria using Fuzzy logic (uncertainty Aleatory - irreducible) and acknowledging a failing level in observationally (uncertainty optimistic & reducible).
👉🏾 Perimeter demarcation under Zero Trust becomes less about a single network edge and more about enforcing trust boundaries around every asset, user, and transaction.

---

Safety, Cyber Security axioms demarcation

Why Demarcation Matters in Zero Trust:

• Reduces Attack Surface By crystallizing where resources located, the channels an attacker can explore become smaller.
• Enables Least-Privilege Every micro-perimeter enforces only the minimal rights needed, nowhere is implicit trust assumed.
• Limits Lateral Movement Compartmentalized zones prevent an initial compromise from cascading across the environment.
• Drives Observability Sensor-equipped boundaries generate low-noise, high-fidelity telemetry at precisely the points where adversaries test defences.

---

⟲ AK-1.2.3 System understanding, taxonomy, rules

System rules, understanding, taxonomy

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/rossronald_the-full-array-of-guidance-for-business-and-activity-7369450862299058177-BdL6 The full array of guidance for business and government is far richer than you might imagine – it includes not only rules, but permissions, authorizations, rights, warranties, and logical implications (inference rules). In organizations today, this guidance is not at all unified, but is spread more or less haphazardly across large numbers of processes and systems, both automated and not. No wonder operational governance and compliance proves so difficult and expensive. We need a unified view – and the right kind of platforms to support it.

---

⟲ AK-1.2.4 System undertanding asking the right questiona

A 6*6 reference framework of questions

"the-six-socratic-questions" (Charles Leon)

1. Questions for clarification.
   1. What is the problem you are trying to solve?
   2. Can you give me an example?
   3. Can you explain further?
   4. Are you saying…?
2. Questions that probe assumptions.
   1. What could we assume instead?
   2. Are you assuming…?
   3. How can you verify or disprove that assumption?
   4. Is that always the case?
   5. What would happen if…?
3. Questions that probe reason and evidence.
   1. What would an example be?
   2. What is this analogous to?
   3. Why do you say that?
   4. How do you know?
   5. Why? 5x
   6. What evidence is there that supports…?
4. Considering alternative perspectives
   1. Are there any alternatives?
   2. What is the other side of the argument?
   3. What makes your viewpoint better?
   4. What is another way to look at it? What is the counter-argument?
   5. Who benefits and who would be affected by this?
   6. What are the strengths and weaknesses of…?
5. Consideration of implications & consequences.
   1. What generalizations are being made?
   2. What are the implications and consequences of the assumption?
   3. How does that affect…?
   4. What if you’re wrong?
   5. What does our experience tell us might happen?
6. Meta-questions. questions about the question.
   1. What is the point of the question?
   2. What does…mean?
   3. Why do you think I asked this question?
   4. How does …apply to everyday life, objectives/mission statement etc.?

---

AK-1.3 Adjusting axioms for the 6x6 RFW

The space for values knowledge, structure, and tradition. reflection, meditation, a journey inward. represent clarity, purpose, or enlightenment—drawing attention to the destination. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

---

⟲ AK-1.3.1 Understanding & describing relevant knowledge

Not using the "Why" but "which" in the 6w1h

👁 💡 Replacing “Why” with “Which” in the Zachman Framework shifts the focus from abstract purpose to concrete decision-making, choosing among viable options based on context, constraints, and priorities. Instead of asking “Why does this system exist?” we now ask “Which option best fulfils our goals?”. This aligns better with adaptive planning, scenario modelling, and option evaluation—especially in dynamic environments like enterprise design or AI governance.

• Stakeholder the strategist focus on: Purpose, intent, goals by a motivations to answer the why.
• Stakeholder the decision-maker want a choice among alternatives in selecting "which one".

Benefits of Using “Which” are:

• Supports Decision Modeling Enables trade-off analysis, scenario evaluation, and multi-criteria decision matrices. where choices drive emergent behavior.
• Aligns with Systems Thinking Encourages feedback loops and adaptive governance—selecting options that evolve with context.
• Bridges Strategy and Execution Makes abstract goals actionable by forcing explicit choices between competing priorities.
• Enhances Simulation & Planning Integrates well with digital twins, behavioral modeling, and agentic architectures.

---

Uniqueness of rows

SIMF_DSEC_01: Support for mandatory legal obligations e.g. financial reporting.

• Rationale:
  
  • When mandatory legal obligations are ignored the whole system is in danger.
  • Behaviour and requirements are a category on their own.
    The goal is usually on what has happened, the paste.
  • There must be a CapCom Information role for enabling the fast reactions
• Implications:
  
  • Interactions with a dedicated segmentation is preferable
  • Accountability at the organisation. GDPR: Data controller
  • Responsibility at the technology: GDPR: Data processor

SIMF_DSEC_02: Support for research e.g. customer intelligence and decision information provisioning.

• Rationale:
  
  • Any impact on the system as a whole matters the system as a whole
  • Behaviour and requirements are a category on their own.
    The goal is usually on what is likely to happen, the future in scenarios.
  • There must be a CapCom Information role for enabling the fast reactions
• Implications:
  
  • Interactions with a dedicated segmentation is preferable
  • Accountability at the organisation. GDPR: Data controller
  • Responsibility at the technology: GDPR: Data processor

---

Uniqueness of columns

---

Uniqueness of cells

---

Anatomy of the system by componenets

---

⟲ AK-1.3.2 Ordered axis using six categories

Identified contexts to instantations

---

Creating products - services within a system

---

Trading products - services

---

Physiology of the system by componenets

---

⟲ AK-1.3.3 Dualities in the Physiology

States vs transformations

---

Enabling technology vs executing technology

---

External product - service delivery vs getting, retrieving resources

---

Neurology of the system and the components

---

⟲ AK-1.3.4 Four perspectives, projections in reference frames

Omissions getting solved by assumptions

---

Non linearity of the system: chaotic predictablity

---

The ratio of four perspectives

---

Generic applicablity, universality

Context doamains:
Fractals:
Consolidations:
Discussions:
The PupostpExcellence Isn’t an Accident

• It is so general that it is difficult to pin it down and criticize it as being anything except too comprehensive. Yet, most would agree that the framework, by itself, doesn't solve any actual problems that EA is asked to solve.
• Perhaps we can resolve some of this ongoing saga by better highlighting the difference between a Zachman framework and The Zachman Framework. Then we can understand the intention of John Zachman, as well as how organisations actually use the tool, both aspects are important to an encyclopedia.
/ul>

---

The systems thinking 6*6 reference frame in an engineering context.

Role	Abstraction	Focus
What	Bills of Material	Which components are needed?	The parts are defining how they interact
How	Functional Specs	Which processes or algorithms apply?	The function decides where each part goes
Where	Drawings / Geometry	Which layout or topology is optimal?	From a layout:assign roles—who installs, who monitors, who responds.
Who	Operating Instructions	Which roles or agents are responsible?	The timing of actions by roles-who
When	Timing Diagrams	Which sequence or timing pattern fits?	Align all decisions for the system and in the system.
Which	Design Objectives → Choices	Which design path best meets constraints and goals?	With purpose: security, reliability, user-friendliness

Although the interactions are in a linear line there is no sequential analyticl approach but an iterative one. Each abstraction isolates one dimension of the system, reducing ambiguity and assumptions. If you skip one—say, you don’t define when things happen—you risk performance issues or user frustration. As Zachman notes, missing interrogatives lead to implicit assumptions, which are breeding grounds for defects.

AK-1.4 Basics systems internals 6x6 RFW

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

---

⟲ AK-1.4.1 The context in an internal reference frame

Relevant concepts in considerations

---

Relevant transformations for considerations

---

Positive and negative effects in transformations

---

⟲ AK-1.4.2 The ordered internal states axis

States in the internal purpose line: culture

An example for leaders applying the lean mindset: Excellence Isn’t an Accident (LEI James Morgan 2025)
If you want to create world class products, first you must develop world-class people. That isn’t an accident. It is the result of a culture of discipline, craftsmanship, and the pursuit of mastery at every level of the organization.

1. What 👁 Putting People First: Organizing your development system and using lean practices to support people to reach their full potential and perform their best sets up your organization to develop great products and services your customers will love.
2. How 👁 Understanding before Executing: Taking the time to understand your customers and their context while exploring and experimenting to develop knowledge helps you discover better solutions that meet your customers’ needs.
3. Where 👁 Developing Products Is a Team Sport: Leveraging a deliberate process and supporting practices to engage team members across the enterprise from initial ideas to delivery ensures that you maximize value creation.
4. Who 👁 Synchronizing Workflows: Organizing and managing the work concurrently to maximize the utility of incomplete yet stable data enables you to achieve flow across the enterprise and reduce time to market.
5. When 👁 Building in Learning and Knowledge reuse: Creating a development system that encourages rapid learning, reuses existing knowledge, and captures new knowledge to make it easier to use in the future helps you build a long-term competitive advantage.
6. Which 👁 Designing the Value Stream: Making trade-offs and decisions throughout the development cycle through a lens of what best supports the success of the future delivery value stream will improve its operational performance.

The LPPD Guiding Principles provide a holistic framework for effective and efficient product and service development, enabling you to achieve your development goals.

---

States in the internal purpose line culture

An example for leaders what the should do by actvities. 18 practices for ceo's (Alex Nesbitt 2025 reference to McKinsey)

What are Frameworks?

1. What ➡External Stakeholders Centre on the long term "why" (purpose)
2. How ➡Board engagement Help directors, help the business
3. Where ➡Team &mp processes Put dynamics ahead of mechanics
4. Who ➡Personal Norms Do what you can do
5. When ➡Culture & organisation Manage both health and performance
6. Which ➡Corporate strategy Focus on beating the odds.

---

⟲ AK-1.4.3 Positive internal goals in transformations

Positive actions in transformations

18 practices for ceo's (Alex Nesbitt 2025 reference to McKinsey)

• Universe ➡ (What) External Stakeholders
  • Commit to making a positive big picture impact
  • Prioritize stakeholders and shape their views
  • Build capabilities/resilience before the crises
• (What) External Stakeholders ➡ (How) Board engagement
  • Promote an agenda beyond the financials
  • Build and foster active board relationships
  • Transform the board from passive and weak to active and capable
• (How) Board engagement ➡ (Where) Team &mp processes
  • Actively strengthen the team and its teamwork
  • Defend against bias (cognitive and social)
  • Ensure coherence across processes and levels
• (Where) Team &mp processes ➡ (Who) Personal Norms
  • Seek out high-quality support and advice
  • Authentically connect purpose to leadership
  • Counter hubris with candid advice and practices
• (Who) Personal Norms ➡ (When) Culture & organisation
  • Match high impact roles with best talent
  • Actively drive organisation effectiveness
  • Decide wat needs stable and what needs to be agile
• (When) Culture & organisation ➡ (Which) Corporate strategy
  • Reframe the definition of winning
  • Make bold moves early in your tenure
  • Actively redistribute resources to strategy
• (Which) Corporate strategy ➡ Universe
• (intentionally left empty)
This is where the Matrix lives. The challenge of the X-matrix is that only the half, three cell items of the complete line of six ordered cells is present.

---

⟲ AK-1.4.4 Negative results by assumptions

Negative actions in transformations

18 practices for ceo's (Alex Nesbitt 2025 reference to McKinsey)

• Universe ➡ (What) External Stakeholders Minimize time with external stakeholders
  • Focus solely an shareholder value
  • Engage in ad-hoc reactive manner
  • Assume crisis aren't going to happen
• (What) External Stakeholders ➡ (How) Board engagement Stay hands off:
  • Passively let the board control the agenda
  • Minimize interactions and avoid the board
  • Let the board evolve without a plan
• (How) Board engagement ➡ (Where) Team &mp processes Avoid responsibility for the team:
  • Allow silos, discord and passive aggressive behaviour
  • Avoid debate and "final" decisions
  • Become a captive of the bureaucratic system
• (Where) Team &mp processes ➡ (Who) Personal Norms Let the world happen to you:
  • Let the system define your schedule and priorities
  • Adapt a fixed mindset = I am who I am
  • Cultivate a "royalty" like status
• (Who) Personal Norms ➡ (When) Culture & organisation Diplomatic avoid social issues:
  • Work around mediocrity and low performance
  • Assume desired behaviours and values will be followed
  • Put feelings before effectiveness
• (When) Culture & organisation ➡ (Which) Corporate strategy Let a thousand flowers bloom:
  • Make vague and generic statements of intent
  • Make small bets with unclear paths to scale
  • Maintain the status quo
• (Which) Corporate strategy ➡ Universe
  • (intentionally left empty)
  This is where the Matrix lives. The challenge of the X-matrix is that only the half, three cell items of the complete line of six ordered cells is present.

There is a natural variation over all components by cells and transformations interactions between the cells.

• (nothing mentioned)

---

What are Frameworks?

why-cheap-is-the-most-expensive-decision-activity (Alper Ozel 2025)

---

AK-1.5 Basics systems externals 6x6 RFW

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

---

⟲ AK-1.5.1 The context in an external reference frame

Relevant concepts in considerations

---

Relevant transformations for considerations

---

Positive and negative effects in transformations

---

⟲ AK-1.5.2 The ordered external states axis

States in the external purpose line

From a tool claining to support "What are Frameworks?" Application Portfolio Management

1. Where 👁 Manage your Application Portfolio in one solution. Perform Lifecycle Assessment, T.I.M.E. Analysis, and improve your data quality on an ongoing basis.
2. How 👁 Align your investment portfolio with capability maps to better connect strategic goals and critical functions.
3. What 👁 With single source of truth, manage your master data to make business impact decisions, and ensure business continuity
4. Which 👁 Map your Business Processes, gain holistic overview of which processes support which value streams and business capabilities.
5. When 👁 With our Information Objects, you can track your master flows through various integrations, and ensure ongoing GDPR compliance.
6. Who 👁 Track your ideas to form initiatives from creation until approved state as visualised on digital roadmaps.

---

Changing states with the States in the external purpose line

• Plan (How) 👁 A digital knowledgebase for managing architecture processes, storing metadata, and ensuring transparency. It supports decision-making, connects silos in a digital ecosystem, and provides governance. Enterprise Architects oversee it, managing terms and keeping knowledge assets clear and accessible.
• Do (what) 👁 Strategic Planning to empower Business Architects to set strategic goals by aligning current Capabilities with future objectives through gap analysis. This approach supports transformation planning, driving informed decisions and goal-focused change by integrating Business Architecture.
• Check (Which) 👁 Applications and Technology optimisation Helps optimise Applications and Technology by working with architects to simplify and standardise Processes. With a focus on stability, these efforts improve efficiency and support long-term growth and transformation. With strong support for APM and standard management.
• Act (when) 👁 Capabilities for Portfolio Planning, combining strategic, tactical, and operational initiatives. Optimisable gate-process ensures value creation aligned with strategic goals, not just cost allocation. Also allowing Solution Architects to share their designs with each initiative.

---

⟲ AK-1.5.3 Positive external goals in transformations

Examples for the goals in transformations

Combining: 7 abilities of execution with
7M process management (Alper Ozel 2025

---

Positive actions in transformations

• Universe ➡ (Where) Application Portfolio Detect Abnormalities: A skilled person can identify problems in early stages before they cause significant damage or downtime. This requires constant vigilance and attention to detail during regular operations, developing sensitivity to indicators that may suggest potential issues. Sensitivity to: subtle changes in performance, unusual sounds, vibrations.
• (Where) Application Portfolio ➡ (How) capability maps Regulate to normal: Once abnormalities are detected, executives / operators must be able to restore equipment to normal operating conditions. This requires executives / operators to develop technical skills and judgment to determine which issues they can address by themselves and which require special assistance. This ability necessitates basic understanding of equipment principles. Tasks like tightening loose connections, replacing worn parts, lubrication or basic adjustments are in this category
• (How) capability maps ➡ (What) master data management Analyze Factors: Executives / Operators must develop analytical skills to trace issues to root causes rather than simply addressing symptoms. If operators understand the relationship between various components and systems, this allows them to connect seemingly unrelated symptoms to common causes. By understanding the principles of how equipment functions, operators can make informed decisions
• (What) master data management ➡ (which) holistic overview Understand Causes: Understanding deeper knowledge of equipment functionality and working principles, allows operators to troubleshoot effectively and implement preventive measures. Thus, they can identify not just what went wrong but why it went wrong and how to prevent it in future
• (Which) holistic overview ➡ (When) track your master flows Establish Conditions: Executives / Operators must learn to set clear standards that define normal operating conditions. This includes developing specific schedules for cleaning, lubrication and inspection; component wear limits, and performance metrics. By establishing conditions, operators create objective standards that remove ambiguity from decisions and ensure consistency across
• (When) track your master flows ➡ (Who) Track your ideas Improve Conditions: Executives / operators must develop the ability to improve difficult to perform tasks. This ability allows executives / operators to reduce routine tasks, conducted at longer intervals, and completed in less time. This is a shift from reactive to proactive thinking, where executives operators actively seek ways to improve performance and reliability through design modifications, procedure updates
• (Who) Track your ideas ➡ Universe Manage Conditions: As top ability, executives / operators must comply with rules and procedures while also establishing new rules to ensure compliance. This management ability transforms executives / operators into equipment stewards who not only follow protocols but also contribute to development/enforcement.

---

⟲ AK-1.5.4 Negative results by assumptions

What are Frameworks?

From 4M to 7M; from Chaos to Control (Alper Ozel 2025

---

Negative actions in transformations

• Universe ➡ (Where) Application Portfolio
  Detect Abnormalities: (Machine - Process)
  • Is the system running within validated & approved parameters?
  • Are ststem change schedules being followed and documented?
  • Are abnormal noises, vibrations and leaks reported and addressed?
  • Are interlock, sensors and emergency stops functioning properly?
  • is the equipment setup/fixture as per the approved process sheet?
• (Where) Application Portfolio ➡ (How) capability maps
  Regulate to normal: (Man - People)
  • Is the executive / operator certified or trained for the specific process?
  • Are WI/SOPs clearly understood and accessible at the point of use?
  • Are roles, responsibilities and shift handovers well defined?
  • Is the executive / operator following standardized work procedures?
  • Is there evidence of skill validation or competency assessments?
• (How) capability maps ➡ (What) master data management
  Analyze Factors: (Measure - Technology)
  • Is the system running within validated & approved parameters?
  • Are PM schedules being followed and documented?
  • Are abnormal noises, vibrations and leaks reported and addressed?
  • Are interlock, sensors and emergency stops functioning properly?
  • is the equipment setup/fixture as per the approved process sheet?
• (What) master data management ➡ (which) holistic overview
  Understand Causes: (Method)
  • Are standard operating procedure (Sops) available and followed?
  • Is the actual process flow aligned with an approved control plan?
  • Are process changes controlled and documented?
  • Are poka-yoka (errorfree-proofing) methods installed & functioning?
  • Are ergonomic & safety requirements considered in the methods?
• (Which) holistic overview ➡ (When) track your master flows
  Establish Conditions: (e.g. Maintenance)
  • Is PM being conducted as per schedule and documented?
  • Are breakdowns recorded analysed amp closed with actions?
  • Are critical spares available and stored properly?
  • Are lubrications & cleaning standards displayed and followed?
  • Are TPM boards, tags, or visual controls actively maintained?
• (When) track your master flows ➡ (Who) Track your ideas
  Improve Conditions: (Measure)
  • Are measuring instruments calibrated and within validated date?
  • Are inspection results recorded and traceable?
  • Are critical-to-quality (CTQ) parameters measured as per plan?
  • is statistical process control (SPC) implemented for (CTQ's)?
  • Are any NCs during measurement adresses through CAPA?
• (Who) Track your ideas ➡ Universe
  Manage Conditions:
  • (intentionally left empty)
  This is where the Matrix lives. The challenge of the X-matrix is that only the half, three cell items of the complete line of six ordered cells.

There is a natural variation over all components by cells and transformations interactions between the cells.

• Is the ambient temperature, lightning and humidity controlled as required?
• Are environmental conditions monitored and logged regularly?
• Are dust vibrations or external contaminations controlled?
• Is the shopfloor clean and organized (5s conditions)?
• Are seasonal or external environment risks considered & mitigated?

---

AK-1.6 Learning maturity from 6x6 RFW's

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

---

⟲ AK-1.6.1 Distractors by hype and buzzwords

Acronyms the fast food gravity for uncertaintity

From a linkedin discussion the weirdness in word buzz. VUCA, BANI and RUPT: rapid, unpredictable, paradoxical, tangled, TUNA: turbulent, uncertain, novel, ambiguous. ViBRanT a cool acronym for marketing: ViBRanT = dynamic, lively, pulsating, swinging.
Every few years a new alphabet soup is cooked but Complexity cannot be reduced to four letters. Those who want to understand should stop collecting acronyms and start studying complexity, thinking about it, and applying it in practice. Acronyms are fast food for thinking, quickly consumed but without nutritional value. Complexity is slow food; it requires time, attention, and discussion, but it truly satisfies.
This jumping to acronyms for branding, marketing is a market on his own.

---

Acronyms used to promote attitude in marketing attitude

It is hard to promote and change an attitude of people. Using acronyms and marketing is attempted for branding. A rythm An example BEATs. In everything we do, we are:

• B Bold: Encourages confident leadership and risk-taking within strategic bounds.
• E Enterprising Signals initiative, innovation, and a growth mindset.
• A Authentic: Promotes integrity and genuine communication—key for trust and culture.
• T Tactical: Implies strategic thinking and execution, vital for business operations.
• s Smart: Reflects modernity, adaptability, and informed decision-making.

The distractor: the name “BEATS” is heavily associated with the consumer electronics brand. causing confusion or unintended associations, especially in global or tech-savvy markets

---

Acronyms the fast food for process cycles

Unfortunately, that's not the only thing that's happening with a multitude of acronyms like PDCA, DMAIC, ADKAR, OODA, ADDIE (Analyze–Design–Develop–Implement–Evaluate) , SCARF (Status–Certainty–Autonomy–Relatedness–Fairness), SOAR (Strengths–Opportunities–Aspirations–Results), AGIL (Adaptation–Goal attainment–Integration–Latency) and many more.
The similarities in these frameworks:

• Structured stages: Each model breaks down complex change into manageable steps.
• Feedback loops: Most include evaluation or reflection phases to refine the process.
• Cross-disciplinary use: are used in business, tech, healthcare, education, and more.
• Scalability: can be applied at individual, team, or organizational levels.

How is it possible to reduce those to something simple and universal?

---

⟲ AK-1.6.2 About Frameworks for architecture

Distractors by Frameworks as directives

---

Frameworks er Distractors by Frameworks as directives

---

⟲ AK-1.6.3 Unification by associations using visuals

Representing ideas in visuals orientation distractors.

---

⟲ AK-1.6.4 Learning form trying to understand complex systems

The world is a continuum.

46 lessons (I learned about system thinking, Ron Immink ) There are no separate systems. Everything we think we know about the world is a model. Every word and every language is a model. All maps and statistics, books and databases, equations and computer programs are models. So are the ways you picture the world in your head—your mental models. None of these is or ever will be the real world.
Once we see the relationship between structure and behaviour, we can begin to understand how systems work, what makes them produce poor results, and how to shift them into better behaviour patterns. These behaviour-based models are more useful than event-based ones, but they have fundamental problems. They typically overemphasise system flows and underemphasize stocks.
The lessons I picked up:

1. Because of feedback delays within complex systems, by the time a problem becomes apparent, it may be unnecessarily difficult to solve. A stitch in time saves nine.
2. Don’t put all your eggs in one basket.
3. Systems happen all at once.
4. The behaviour of a system cannot be known just by knowing the elements of which the system is made.
5. When a living creature dies, it loses its “system-ness.”
6. Elements do not have to be physical things. Intangibles are also elements of a system.
7. Once you start listing the elements of a system, there is almost no end to the process.
8. Many of the interconnections in systems operate through the flow of information. Information holds systems together and plays a great role in determining how they operate.
9. Purposes are deduced from behaviour, not from rhetoric or stated goals.
10. Keeping sub-purposes and overall system purposes in harmony is an essential function of successful systems.
11. A system generally goes on being itself, changing only slowly if at all, even with complete substitutions of its elements—as long as its interconnections and purposes remain intact.
12. The least obvious part of the system, its function or purpose, is often the most crucial determinant of the system’s behaviour.
13. A change in purpose changes a system profoundly, even if every element and interconnection remains the same.
14. Interconnections are also critically important. Changing relationships usually change system behaviour.
15. Stock is the foundation of any system. Stocks are the elements of the system that you can see, feel, count, or measure at any given time.
16. A stock is the memory of the history of changing flows within the system.
17. Stocks generally change slowly, even when the flows into or out of them change suddenly. Therefore, stocks act as delays or buffers or shock absorbers in systems.
18. Changes in stocks set the pace of the dynamics of systems.
19. The time lags that come from slowly changing stocks can cause problems in systems, but they also can be sources of stability.
20. The presence of stocks allows inflows and outflows to be independent of each other and temporarily out of balance with each other.
21. Human beings have invented hundreds of stock-maintaining mechanisms to make inflows and outflows independent and stable.
22. Most individual and institutional decisions are designed to regulate the levels in stocks.
23. Systems thinkers see the world as a collection of stocks along with the mechanisms for regulating the levels in the stocks by manipulating flows.
24. The information delivered by a feedback loop can only affect future behaviour; it can’t deliver the information, and so can’t have an impact fast enough to correct the behaviour that drove the current feedback.
25. Complex behaviours of systems often arise as the relative strengths of feedback loops shift, causing first one loop and then another to dominate behaviour.
26. Delays are pervasive in systems, and they are strong determinants of behaviour. Changing the length of a delay may (or may not, depending on the type of delay and the relative lengths of other delays) make a large change in the behaviour of a system.
27. Whenever we see a growing entity, whether it be a population, a corporation, a bank account, a rumour, an epidemic, or sales of a new product, we look for the reinforcing loops that are driving it and for the balancing loops that ultimately will constrain it.
28. A quantity growing exponentially toward a constraint or limit reaches that limit in a surprisingly short time.
29. When a subsystem’s goals dominate at the expense of the total system’s goals, the resulting behaviour is called suboptimisation.
30. When a systems thinker encounters a problem, the first thing he or she does is look for data, time graphs, the history of the system.
31. Systems rarely have real boundaries.
32. The greatest complexities arise exactly at boundaries.
33. You can often stabilise a system by increasing the capacity of a buffer.
34. We are too fascinated by events. We pay too little attention to their history.
35. Rebuilding is the slowest and most expensive kind of change to make in a system.
36. Things take as long as they take.
37. Missing information flows is one of the most common causes of system malfunction.
38. Paradigms are the sources of systems.
39. The physical structure is crucial in a system, but is rarely a leverage point, because changing it is rarely quick or simple.
40. Disorderly, mixed-up borders are sources of diversity and creativity.
41. Changing the length of a delay may utterly change behaviour.
42. Change comes first from stepping outside the limited information that can be seen from any single place in the system and getting an overview.
43. We don’t give all incoming signals their appropriate weights
44. Remember that hierarchies exist to serve the bottom layers, not the top.
45. Thou shalt not distort, delay, or withhold information.
46. Power over the rules is real power.

Systems need to be managed not only for productivity or stability, but they also need to be managed for resilience. Resilience is “the ability to bounce or spring back into shape, position, etc., after being pressed or stretched. The ability to recover strength, spirits, good humour, or any other aspect quickly.” is a measure of a system’s ability to survive and persist within a variable environment. The opposite of resilience is or rigidity. There are always limits to resilience.

---