logo jabes

Designing Shape Organisations


🎭 Concerns & Indices Elucidation 👁 Summary Vitae 🎭

👐 C-Steer C-Serve C-Shape 👁 I-C6isr I-Jabes I-Know👐
👐 r-steer r-serve r-shape 👁 r-c6isr r-jabes r-know👐

🔰 Contents Frame-ref OR Forest Metrics DO LSS CMM3-4OO 🔰
  
🚧  TIP Risk O-ALC Gemba Stations DO PDCA CMM4-4OO 🚧
  
🎯 101-IS VM-VMs Ideate-EE Plan-EE DO-4OO CMM5-4OO 🎯


A-1 Basics optimizing processes, lean


A-1.1 Contents

A-1.1.1 Looking forward - paths by seeing directions
mediation, innovation
BI life devops bianl design sdlc design data devops bpm devops sdlc When the image link fails, 🔰 click here.
Contexts:
r-shape details on mediation communication
C-Serve context on technology, models
I-C6isr context on organisational control
r-serve details on technology, processes
r-C6isr details on organisational control

The "What" of applying mediation, thinking on innovation
Missing a mature context of systems, enterprises, missions, organisations whatever word is suitable. These two ideas are good fit for a better generic structure although both of them are needing adjustments. The generic structure with a model for tasks & roles DevOps-Portfolio Plan and FrontEnd-BackEnd is for both of them missing.
The first abstraction level for understanding the role and position in the backend for its meaning is that it is about mediation, diplomacy doing ambassady role. There is no adaption to change.
⚖ The next abstraction level is the innovation vision, changing assets in the system as a whole. Inventions (historic) A lot needs to get solved, it is about shaping change, adaptions to changes:
The "Why" of knowledge for mediation, innovation
Adapting to change is the answer to why mediation and innovation is needed.
Alvin Toffler Toffler coined the term “future shock” to refer to what happens to a society when change happens too fast, which results in social confusion and normal decision-making processes breaking down.
In The Third Wave, Toffler describes three types of societies, based on the concept of “waves”—each wave pushes the older societies and cultures aside. Adapting to change is the answer to why knowledge management is needed. In managing knowledge a good system of reference is needed at creation, documenting and retrieving.
⚒ According to Karl Popper The growth of human knowledge proceeds from our problems and from our attempts to solve them. These attempts involve the formulation of theories which must go beyond existing knowledge and therefore require a leap of the imagination. For this reason, he places special emphasis on the role played by the creative imagination in theory formulation. The priority of problems in Popper’s account of science is paramount, and it is this which leads him to characterise scientists as “problem-solvers”.
The personal freedom (liberte). The Open Society and Its Enemies (1945), Popper's' most impassioned and influential social works, are powerful defences of democratic liberalism, and strident critiques of philosophical presuppositions underpinning all forms of totalitarianism.
Falsifiability criterion for demarcating science from non-science:
real support can be obtained only from observations undertaken as tests (by ‘attempted refutations’); and for this purpose criteria of refutation have to be laid down beforehand: it must be agree which observable situations, if actually observed, mean that the theory is refuted.

Adapting to change is an options for avoiding disastrous conflicts. In the quest for power, fame and wealth breaking down all competitors is a fast option but has the possible result of all being destroyed.
⚖ Plans don't always survive the first moments of a
realisation. Carl von Clausewitz ruled out any rigid system of rules and principles for the conduct of war, celebrating instead the free operation of genius, changing historical conditions, moral forces, and the elements of uncertainty and chance. These elements, especially the enemy’s counteractions, give war a nonlinear logic. Every simple action encounters “friction”, in Clausewitz’s borrowed metaphor from mechanics, which slows it down and may frustrate it.
There is an important change in frictions, wars. His generation witnessed the collapse of the limited warfare of ancien regimes in the face of the all-out effort and strategy of destruction, or total war, unleashed by the French Revolution and Napoleon. While very conscious of the changing social and political conditions that had brought about this transformation of warfare, Clausewitz, like his contemporaries, held that the new, sweeping way of war making, culminating in the decisive battle and the overthrow of the enemy country, reflected the true nature of war and the correct method of its conduct.
A-1.1.2 Local content
Reference Squad Abbrevation
A-1 Basics optimizing processes, lean
A-1.1 Contents contents Contents
A-1.1.1 Looking forward - paths by seeing directions
A-1.1.2 Local content
A-1.1.3 Guide reading this page
A-1.1.4 Progress
A-1.2 Reference question: What to change? combase_02 Frame-ref
A-1.2.1 About Frameworks for architecture
A-1.2.2 About Enterprise Architecture frameworks
A-1.2.3 Changing the way of changing
A-1.2.4 Non-linear, non predictable change abstraction
A-1.3 Reference question: How to change? combase_03 OR Forest
A-1.3.1 Understanding of the what for change
A-1.3.2 Understanding the how to change, lean
A-1.3.3 Getting metrics using sensors (Gemba)
A-1.3.4 Getting metrics in administrative/cyber processes
A-1.4 Reference question: Where to change? combase_04 Metrics
A-1.4.1 Optimizing systems by lines in functions
A-1.4.2 Controls metrics lines in functions
A-1.4.3 ALC-V3 model, sensors metrics - controls
A-1.4.4 A living cycloid information system model
A-1.5 Reference question: when to change? combase_05 DO LSS
A-1.5.1 Pre-requisite: insight from context to details
A-1.5.2 Pre-requisite: insight for appropiate maturity
A-1.5.3 Mindsets: philosophy for changing systems
A-1.5.4 Mindsets: methodogies for changing systems
A-1.6 Maturity 3: Operational Improvements in control combase_06 CMM3-4OO
A-1.6.1 A generic reference framework per discipline
A-1.6.2 Regulations: technicals & functionals
A-1.6.3 Retro perspective on risks &uncertainties by Strategy
A-1.6.4 The maturity of: Incentives, Culture, Structure, Resources
A-2 Improving enterprises design & value streams
A-2.1 Frictions for changing what always was done comline_01 TIP Risk
A-2.2.1 Frictions by management wanting control by causation
A-2.2.2 Gaps for understanding requirements to identifications
A-2.2.3 Failing in understanding abstraction concepts, two dimensions
A-2.2.4 Failing to abstract in many dimensions, most important Time
A-2.2 Change the position to enabling adaptivity comline_02 O-ALC
A-2.2.1 Components detailed in contexts
A-2.2.2 Components as a whole in contexts
A-2.2.3 The path to instantions from contexts
A-2.2.4 The path to motivation from materials
A-2.3 Frictions in managing risks, uncertainties comline_03 Gemba
A-2.3.1 Frictions by wanting certainties but reality are uncertainties
A-2.3.2 Gaps for understanding information process uncertainties
A-2.3.3 The quest in understanding abstractions, documenting knowledge
A-2.3.4 The quest for safe information processes not harming the value
A-2.4 Systems: identification to instantiation (lean) comline_04 Stations
A-2.4.1 Dualities in the system & model assumptions vs reality
A-2.4.2 Value in information flow: Feed back, closed loops, Control
A-2.4.3 Adjustments for the Zachman 6*6 systems thinking framework
A-2.4.4 Integrating systems thinking to lean and more
A-2.5 Realizing instantiations in line with identifications comline_05 DO PDCA
A-2.5.1 PDCA cycle administrative support
A-2.5.2 Working Cell Goal: Aligned Operations
A-2.5.3 Document Information retrieval & delivery
A-2.5.4 Document Information retrieval & delivery
A-2.6 Maturity 4: Control change Processes in systems comline_06 CMM4-4OO
A-2.6.1 Understanding the pillars How and When for the Why
A-2.6.2 Deep dives BiAnl
A-2.6.3 External references
A-2.6.4 Maturity Tactical Shape Planes: People, Processes, Machines
A-3 Encourage the enterprise by decisions in wisdom
A-3.1 Simple information & services comtdss_01 101-IS
A-3.1.1 Simple Aligned data management - Process management
A-3.1.2 Simple Organising Enterprise Services
A-3.2 Vision & mission for Visions & Missions comtdss_02 VM-VMs
A-3.2.1 Strategy Visions
A-3.2.2 Wishful thinking: in control with missions
A-3.3 Ideate Enterprise Enablement comtdss_03 Ideate-EE
A-3.3.1 Enterprise Culture vision
A-3.3.2 Workforce enablement, structured approaches
A-3.4 Planning optimised lean organisations comtdss_04 Plan-EE
A-3.4.1 Do optimize the planner, the decision maker
A-3.4.2 The closed loop control
A-3.4.3 Translation missions visions into change
A-3.5 Realizing optimised lean organisations comtdss_05 DO-4OO
A-3.5.1 PDCA cycle administrative support
A-3.5.2 PDCA organise the enterprise in the nine-plane
A-3.5.3 PDCA changing the enterprise: processes missions
A-3.6 Maturity 5: Controlled Enterprise Changes comtdss_06 CMM5-4OO
A-3.6.1 Maturity tools "Cyber/administrative"
A-3.6.2 Summary Advice organisational leaders
A-3.6.3 3M retrospective CMM-4IT - CMM-4AS - CMM-4OO
A-3.6.4 Following steps

A-1.1.3 Guide reading this page
⚒ Three evolutionary steps for enterprise identifications
There are stages for an enterprises, organisations:
  1. In the first wave the ad-hoc organisation created hierarchical leaders.
    A similarity in biology is the leader of a herd.
    Resolving conflicts caused by disputes in interests within the community the major task of the leader.
  2. In the "second wave" standard (repeatable) organisations were created in subgroups delegated by hierarchical leaders, captains of the industry.
    It was the technology with mass production changing the way of living for the whole group pushing this.
    Another aspect is it got serving multiple products / services (multi tenancy) for the best performance and the best profits on all layers.
    Without a single leader for the whole conflicts caused by disputes in interests within the community to be solved by an independent force.
    In the industrial approach information processing got far more important. A change that is a source for evolution into a next change
  3. In the "third wave" complex (adaptive) enterprises organisations are needed. This breaks with the classical idea of hierarchical leadership, captains that er in lead of activity.
    It's technology that has made information available in a way that was previously impossible. Information overload and information bias have become problems that didn't exist before.
    Without a single leader for the whole by decisions and conflicting interests within the community That needs to be solved by an independent force.
    Redirecting as much of possible for decisions to the edge avoids overloading in the decisions to be made. This demands a level of acceptance by risks and uncertainties for all in the whole.
  4. There are six pillars columns divided by funnctional and technical ones.
    A futuristic vision is a positive attitude but can easily become negative when too far from reality.

    Fractal details 6*6 reference frame
    details systems life 6x6 systems lean infotypes logframe technology logframe C&ampC details Jabes: Mindset & tools When the image link fails, 🔰 click here.
    There are details for the complexity in understaning of 6*6 reference frames.
    Contexts:
    C-Shape 👓 6x6 reference frames
    infotypes
    techflows
    r-c6isr organisational control
    I-Jabes technology, models


    These fractal details are in shift in the content. Working in a 6*6 frame for knowledge the problem arose that this is not very well defined at all. That a 3*3 and 2*2 are conslidation variants of the 6*6 reference frame makes it even harder.
    👁 💡 What is needed is a more strict definition of states and relationships for the interactions of content demarcated by cells. For the SQL usage with tuple theory that was done nicely (Ted F.Codd). Even when closely related to that when it was build up, it is very difficult to copy that into a complete different setting.
    The time dimension paste, now, future.
    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.

    NDMA five organizational systems
    ⚙ How organizations should work
    Aligning to organsitional processes requires understanding those basics. Management books are a big market, usefull fundamental insights scarce. NDMA Dean Meyer
    Your organizational operating model sends signals that guide people day by day. Organizational transformation is a matter of "reprogramming" these signals. So, where do those signals come from, and what can executives "program" in organizations?
    • Structure: the organization chart that determines people's specialties and the reporting hierarchy
    • Internal economy: the resource-governance processes that decide budgets (business planning); align resources with business priorities, approve projects, and manage demand
    • Culture: the patterns of behavior generally manifested throughout the organization
    • Processes, methods, and tools: the cross-boundary processes, procedures, methods, skills, and technologies that enhance people's competence
    • Metrics and rewards: the dashboards people use to monitor their work and adjust their behaviors accordingly; the performance metrics (KPIs) that their managers use to judge their work

    Shape Invent 9-plane
    “Strategic Shaping” - “Concept Design”
    In an orientation from outside to inside. From outside to inside the question is what the position of a system, e.g. entperise, is related to the external environment in context to other systems.
    The used terms for the figure with a quadrant are basically two pillars. It are the transformations in between that are as important as the subjects. The result is not a quadrant but a nine-plane. The coordination, brain, in the centre.
    It captures: The diagonals are the ones that are dichotomies and are dichotomies.
    The 9-plane is a simplification from the six*six reference area. Several disciplines, usual four, are connected to a 3-dimensional construction where the time is an important aspect.
    A-1.1.4 Progress
    done and currently working on:
  • 2024 week 13
    1. Draft version finished including part 2.
    2. Stakeholder owner to be found at""Shape" - Tactical.
  • 2025 week 28
    1. Only the first six chapters 1.1 to 1.6 are updated.
    2. The change:
      • The "how to organize" resulted in a different VSM (viable system) visual than usual. The role of mediation & innovation to get a place.
      • Part 1 was, Operational improvements now seen as initial level-1 or repeatable (easy) level-2 That was the agile hype and all previous attempts for increasing productivity.
      • In a well defined state with all good regulators, feed back loops in place it is defined maturity level-3
      • The challenges are in the not that easy part of adapting to external change level-4 and disruptive innovations and level-5.
        These abstracted goals are non linear and not well predictable.
  • 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.

  • Build modern01

    A-1.2 Reference question: What to change?

    Understanding systems and changing systems are several levels of abstraction. When changing systems the complexity on what should be done increases, it is about unpredictability non-linearity. The biggest problem with that: the human demand of anything should be predictable and linear. Challenges for change:
    1. Doing activities as always the same type of construction
    2. Improving the activities for achieving the same
    3. Improving type of construction although same purpose
    4. Creating new type of activities
    5. Creating new type of constructions

    A-1.2.1 About Frameworks for architecture
    What are Frameworks?
    An important question for context in understanding is: What are frameworks about? There is a need for a good definition. Eacoe Enterprise Architecture center of excellence, the ideas based on Zachman by S.Holcman.
    One very misunderstood word is “framework”. Another phrase that may be more useful is a frame of reference. Frames of reference are fundamental to any profession or discipline (engineering, chemistry, physics, linguistics, music—anything). A framework that is in constant update and versioning is troubling. If it is, it is not (or was not) complete.
    A thinking tool is useless when sharing knowledge is not a part of that.
    In the context of enterprise engineering: A proper framework for architects should outline a structure representing the complex interactions between business, information, people, processes, and technology. Thus, views are the other complementary projections of the model.
    There is a challenge with this approach, enterprise engineering doesn't have a sound historical foundation, it is a blue ocean. The previous attempt name business engineering is the same. It emerged with the new hard informations systems in the soft systems . In 1975, David Smyth, a researcher in Checkland's department, observed that SSM was most successful when the root definition included certain elements. These elements, captured in the mnemonic CATWOE. The six elements are a fit for the Zachman framework under the condition of a dedicated frame of references.
    How are Frameworks used?
    Who are the ones that are involved for using those frameworks? Organizations are adding complexity by mapping different frameworks, languages, and notations to an environment that is already too complex to understand. As human beings, we are naturally "visually" oriented. We cannot "see" the essence of a problem or solution in 400 pages of text. What pages and pages of text on a company’s performance cannot achieve, architecture can, with its visual and graphic impact.
    In order to have a profession, there needs to be, there has to be one frame of reference. You can't roll your own, and you can't have multiple frames of references that are there.
    Just removing the EA, Enterprise Architecture, makes it more generic less elitist. Everything is grouped to humans, people, organisations, that are the base elements for alignments in activities. Anybody could be stakeholder and benefit from sharing knowledge. The discipline can be anyone that needs to solve a complex problem for knowledge.
    A BMC blog on Eacoe for Framework teels the EACOE endorses the Zachman Framework.
    Where are Frameworks used?
    A framework a thinking tool is lacking support by tooling. For the mindset:
    EACOE zachman
    Because there is no support for a framework at that level using references and figures, there is an move by practitioners into methodologies, practices and guidelines.
    A methodology is a set of practices and procedures applied to a specific discipline. A methodology contains proven processes to follow in planning, defining, analyzing, designing, building, testing, and implementing the area under consideration. A methodology should allow you to do something "Monday morning", you shouldn't have to figure out how to take a guideline and turn it into a path. How can a beginning practitioner be expected to "modify" or "customize" a methodology if they have not actually done Architecture?
    Methodologies should provide a predefined path or paths a "roadmap" or a "recipe."
    Guidelines or principles are not methodologies.

    A-1.2.2 About Enterprise Architecture frameworks
    What are enterprise architecture frameworks about?
    Collection from (Enterprise Architecture center of excellence): As a note and full disclosure, John Zachman and I (S.Holcman) formed ZIFA - the Zachman Institute for Framework Advancement. John Zachman's original work has not changed. Yes, the understanding of each cell in John's Ontology has advanced.
    The EA reference using the Zachman framework (two dimensions): Based on the work of John Zachman and John Sowa from IBM and elaborations thereof, the EACOE’s Enterprise Framework™ leverages artifacts, diagrams, and abstractions widely recognized by business and technology professionals. The first dimension of the Framework contains the six questions (abstractions or interrogatives) that have been used to investigate objects and events for thousands of years. Each interrogative serves a different purpose and is not interchangeable with the others, each is unique and complete.
    Aside the two dimensional six*six strcuture thre is third dimension involving time. The EA Framework is not just "enterprise architecture", it describes the twelve fundamental architectures in an enterprise. To complement The EA Framework, the Center Of Excellence (EACOE) includes a standard set (methodologies) of skills, practices, definitions, templates, and tools for each step in the process of developing an Enterprise Architecture based on The Enterprise Framework™.
    What are enterprises, what is architecture?
    “Enterprise” defined: The broader the definition of “Enterprise,” the more opportunity there is for integration. A narrow definition of Enterprise leads to more interfacing.
    “Architecture” defined. Enterprise Architecture keeps businesses agile and flexible. Enterprise Architecture thus promotes business optimization by addressing business and information technology architecture, performance management, organizational structure, and processes. It employs the framework to describe an organization’s present and future structure and behavior so that they are consistent with its strategic direction.

    Implementation Frameworks and/or methodologies
    The confusion on framework vs methodology: For an organization desirous of developing an Enterprise Architecture, there are various self-described frameworks to choose. Depending on the complexity and scale of the enterprise, they can select from commercial, defense industry, and government frameworks.
    Frameworks such as DODAF, MODAF, and TOGAF are classified as Implementation Frameworks and/or methodologies in combination with a framework. DODAF, MODAF, and TOGAF's so-called "frameworks" are continuously modified and altered.
    But how was this by methodologies e.g. DODAF started?
    The usual methodology is mentioning the three topics: People - Machines - Processes. It is similar to the DOD (Department Of Defence) Operational - Technical - Systems.
    C4ISR DODAF relations
    First DODAF concept in a figure.
    The first version of the development DoDAF was developed in the 1990s under the name C4ISR Architecture Framework.
    In the same period the reference model TAFIM, which was initiated in 1986, was further developed. The first C4ISR Architecture Framework v1.0, released 7 June 1996, was created in response to the passage of the Clinger-Cohen Act. It addressed the 1995 Deputy Secretary of Defense directive that a DoD-wide effort be undertaken to define and develop a better means and process for ensuring that C4ISR capabilities were interoperable and met the needs of the warfighter.
    Interesting in the original methodology C4ISR areL When looking what it is all about, it is requirement management by an implementation framework, methodology. ❓ Does this help for; ❌ All of this is missing, it is about requirements in a big design upfront. No agility in doing only those when clear enough during the journeys.
    A-1.2.3 Changing the way of changing
    JLowgren AI 9 plane
    Innovations with AI support
    Enterprise Architecture (EA) is facing an identity crisis, and an opportunity. A different direction in EA, until now it is about methodologies by observations. The attempt is for what AI and the role of AI could do but it is hitting the question for why and what to change.
    9-systems in AI (2025 Jesper Lowgren) The tools we’ve inherited were built for stability, compliance, and predictability. Frameworks like TOGAF and Zachman gave us layered views of the enterprise: data, applications, technology, and business functions neatly separated, connected by flows and models. These frameworks helped us manage complexity through structure.
    In this environment, traditional EA becomes reactive. It cannot simulate, coordinate, or govern agentic behavior. Its diagrams describe what was, not what could be. Its controls are too rigid for adaptive systems and its models are too static for continuous learning.
    The accusations against the Zachman frame reference by EA are not justified if the real story is understood. The following is what it was really about. Missing is the idea of frames of reference for disciplines.
    When that gets aligned, it is an architectural shift: At the heart of EA is a simple but powerful question: What does it take to make an enterprise think, learn, and act as a system?
    EA 4.0 demands a new architectural mindset: systemic reasoning. Where meta-modeling shows what’s connected, systemic reasoning shows what causes what. Architects must now think in terms of: Meta-models still matter, but they must be complemented by simulation, scenario design, and behavioral modeling. The architect is no longer just a structural designer. They are a systems choreographer, orchestrating how agents, data, and humans interact over time.

    JLowgren AI 9 systems tabel
    The EA 4.0 system in a table.
    Ordering these nine systems in the simplified three*three Zachman reference layout could help in the understanding of systems in a prescriptive approach.
    The shift is: The Nine Systems give the enterprise its form - its memory, coordination, and sensing. But it’s the Five Forces that make it move. They generate direction, apply pressure, and trigger change. One provides the structure; the other, the will. Together, they create a new kind of cognitive architecture - alive, adaptive, and capable of rebalancing itself in motion as intelligence spreads through every layer of the enterprise.

    A-1.2.4 Non-linear, non predictable change abstraction
    Promoting inventions for change
    In systems theory, every component, every actor or process, has a role, but these roles aren’t just functional. They hold ontological weight: they tell us what a thing is within the system. We can think about this philosophically:
    1. Structural Functionalism (Sociological Systems)
      👉🏾 Each role exists to maintain system equilibrium. Just like the circulatory system and nervous system have distinct but integrated functions in a body, so do roles within organizations, economies, and even knowledge domains.
      Philosophical twist, this raises the question: is identity derived from function?
    2. Autopoiesis (Maturana & Varela)
      👉🏾 Systems are self-producing. Roles emerge not from external design, but from internal coherence. Example: In a beehive, no one assigns the queen bee her role; it emerges via molecular triggers and social feedback.
      Philosophical echo:
      • Are roles essential or contingent?
      • Do they emerge from within us or are they imposed from outside?
    3. Cybernetic Feedback and Role Tensions
      👉🏾 Systems rely on feedback loops to regulate themselves. Roles are part of the construction of a system. Roles that resist to use the feedback loops disrupt the system.
      Philosophical twist of introducing the ethics of roles—what happens when a role refuses its systemic responsibility? E.g., when a journalist becomes an activist, or when a judge refuses neutrality, does the system adapt or collapse?
    4. Differentiation Theory (Luhmann)
      👉🏾 Modern systems specialize. The legal system is segregated from the political, which is segregated from the scientific. These role boundaries prevent systemic contamination but also create islands of meaning.
      This leads to deeper philosophical questions:
      • Can over-segregation blind a system to the whole?
      • Is there wisdom in cross-role hybridity?
    Inventors and diplomats are liminal roles, they bridge boundaries between systems. They operate in zones of low definition, where rules are not fully formed. Philosophically, these roles remind us to: true change doesn’t come from playing a part, it comes from redrawing the stage.
    The role of inventions in change
    If we imagine inventions not as tied to the inventors, but as entities or tools within larger systems, their role becomes analogous to diplomacy in several meaningful ways:
    1. Bridge Builders: Just as diplomacy connects nations, inventions often connect different parts of a system—linking what was with what could be. For example, the printing press didn’t just revolutionize publishing—it rewired the flow of knowledge across society.
    2. Mediators of Change: Diplomacy navigates tensions, while inventions mediate transitions—between manual to mechanical, analog to digital, physical to virtual. An invention can smooth friction within a system just like diplomacy seeks to ease international strain.
    3. System Stabilizers or Disruptors: A diplomat might avert war, but can also provoke reactions with strategic maneuvers. Likewise, an invention can stabilize an industry (e.g., GPS in logistics), or completely upset it (e.g., the smartphone in telecommunications).
      • Cultural Ambassadors: Inventions, like diplomats, carry the cultural and philosophical DNA of their time. The bicycle, the phonograph, even electricity—they embody societal dreams, anxieties, and needs.
      • Adaptation Agents: Diplomats adapt their message to different cultures; inventions, too, are modified and recontextualized when integrated into different systems. Think of how mobile phones evolved differently in rural Kenya vs. urban New York.

    Build modern01

    A-1.3 Reference question: How to change?

    Managing systems and changing systems are different levels of control. When changing systems the complexity on what should be done increases, it is about unpredictable non-linearity. The biggest problem with that is the human demand of anything should be predictable and linear. Challenges for change:
    1. Controlling the "status quo" in activities and constructions
    2. Improving the activities for achieving the same
    3. Improving type of construction although same purpose
    4. Change Control new type of activities
    5. Change Control new type of constructions

    A-1.3.1 Understanding of the what for change
    Defining the scope for approaching change
    Understanding Business & Technology Operational is a prerequisite. There has been a lot of attention for this approach. for some reason it is not being what it has meant to be.
    What could be the problem? Searching for an understandable workable definition of "Operations research". It is the classic area for improving of an enterprise. The basics starts with observing the operations, the shop floor.
    Others did the same using other words, one of them is Lean. Lean is going a step further by adding a lot of cultural behaviour in allowing changes.
    What is operations research (OR), classic
    A good source for technology did mention a definition. This is usable understandable, it could be not a fit for promoting technology. 🤔 What is: OR
    Operations research (OR) is an analytical method of problem-solving and decision-making that is useful in the management of organizations. In operations research, problems are broken down into basic components and then solved in defined steps by mathematical analysis. The process of operations research can be broadly broken down into the following steps:
    1. Identifying a problem that needs to be solved.
    2. Constructing a model around the problem that resembles the
      real world and variables.
    3. Using the model to derive solutions to the problem.
    4. Testing each solution on the model and analyzing its success.
    5. Implementing the solution to the actual problem.
    Disciplines that are similar to, or overlap with, operations research include: All of these techniques have the goal of solving complex problems and improving quantitative decisions. The concept of operations research arose during World War II by military planners. After the war, the techniques used in their operations research were applied to addressing problems in business, the government and society.
    Characteristics of operations research
    There are three primary characteristics of all operations research efforts:
    Importance of operations research
    The field of operations research provides a more powerful approach to decision making than ordinary software and data analytics tools. Employing operations research professionals can help companies achieve more complete datasets, consider all available options, predict all possible outcomes and estimate risk. Additionally, operations research can be tailored to specific business processes or use cases to determine which techniques are most appropriate to solve the problem.
    Uses of operations research
    Operations research can be applied to a variety of use cases, including:

    What is operations research (OR), lean
    This classic descriptions of OR is understandable but hardy usable. The following mentions little parts of lean, is wrrittten by L.Ackhoff OR (Brittanica)
    In the 1970s several Japanese firms, led by the Toyota Motor Corporation, developed radically different approaches to the management of inventories.
    Coined the “just-in-time” approach, the basic element of the new systems was the dramatic reduction of inventories throughout the total production system.
    By relying on careful scheduling and the coordination of supplies, the Japanese ensured that parts and supplies were available in the right quantity, with proper quality, at the exact time they were needed in the manufacturing or assembly process. ....
    A second Japanese technique, called kanban (“card”), also permits Japanese firms to schedule production and manage inventories more effectively. In the kanban system, cards or tickets are attached to batches, racks, or pallet loads of parts in the manufacturing process.

    man_elephant.jpg
    What is operations research (OR), Scholar Source
    This well usable maybe understandable, it is overwhelming by its size and number in topics. OR: Methods and Applications (2023)
    The year 2024 marks the 75th anniversary of the Journal of the Operational Research Society. On this occasion, my colleague Fotios Petropoulos proposed to the editors of the journal to edit an encyclopedic article on the state of the art in OR. ....
    👉🏾 Interestingly, while many recent advances in OR are rooted in theoretical or algorithmic concepts, we are now witnessing a return to the practical roots of OR through the development of new disciplines such as business analytics.
    The public sector and service industries also benefit greatly from OR. Healthcare is the first area that comes to mind because of its very large scale and complexity. Decision making in healthcare is more decentralised than in transportation and manufacturing, for example, and the human issues involved in this sector add a layer of complexity. OR methodologies have also been applied to diverse areas such as education, sports management, natural resources, environment and sustainability, political districting, safety and security, energy, finance and insurance, revenue management, auctions and bidding, and disaster relief, most of which are covered in this article. ....
    👉🏾 Over time, linear programming has branched out into several fields such as nonlinear programming, mixed integer programming, network optimisation, combinatorial optimisation, and stochastic programming. The techniques most frequently employed for the exact solution of mathematical programs are based on branch-and-bound, branch-andcut, branch-and-price (column generation), and dynamic programming.
    👉🏾 Game theory and data envelopment analysis are firmly rooted in mathematical programming.
    👉🏾 Control theory is also part of continuous mathematical optimisation and relies heavily on differential equations.
    👉🏾 Complexity theory is fundamental in optimisation. Most problems arising in combinatorial optimisation are NP-hard and typically require the application of heuristics for their solution. ....
    🕳 In 1979, he published in this journal two articles (Ackoff, 1979a,b) that presented a rather pessimistic view of our discipline. The author complained about the lack of communications between academics and practitioners, and about the fact that some OR curricula in universities did not sufficiently prepare students for practice, which is still true to some extent. ....

    A-1.3.2 Understanding the how to change, lean
    Why Lean - what is lean
    What is operations research (OR), Lean?
    💣 Most of us have experiences with incorrect lean. These are usually very negative. The lessons learned of what has failed to be taken with us to avoid repetition of those.
    Going back to find the "Value Stream" in other words "back to core business". This is about the PDCA - DMAIC approach. What is lean
    👉🏾 Lean Thinking is about creating the most value for the customer at the minimum cost, which is achieved by minimizing resources, time, energy and effort.
    A lean approach to work is about: Lean thinking and practice help organizations become both innovative and competitive, which in turn allows them to become sustainable. Lean principles may have their roots in Toyota's factories in Japan, but today lean thinking has come to represent an alternative, superior approach to doing work - no matter what the work is, the sector or the size of the organization. In a lean organization, problems are opportunities for meaningful learning rather than mistakes to be swept under the rug or quickly resolved.
    Managers act as coaches, helping others get comfortable identifying problems and practicing daily continuous improvement. ...
    👉🏾 🕳What lean is not :
    Situation Input Actions Results, SIAR lean structured processing
    Promoting real lean, the Siar model
    The Siar model: Situation, Input, Actions, Request/Result or Situation, Ideas, Analyses, Request/Result is similar to the PDCA - DMAIC cycle. It just is using other words avoiding to start with a Plan without analyses.
    It covers all of:
    Real lean is a complete mindset switch for all being committed or involved.
    A-1.3.3 Getting metrics using sensors (Gemba)
    shop-floor data
    The shop floor, getting data
    Seeing the shop floor wanting to do operations research is needing information to work with, in jargon needing data. Different Aspects of Seeing a Shop Floor—Data
    In this series on how to understand a shop floor, I talked a lot about the physical shop floor—which in my view is the more important part. However, as mentioned in my last post, looking at already collected data also gives a lot of insight into the shop floor.
    Depending on the aspect you are interested in, data may be the only way to grasp the situation.
    Hence, this post will look deeper into how to work with data to understand the shop floor.
    Introduction for the data collecting.
    As mentioned in my previous post, using collected data can have a few advantages: On the other hand, data has also a few disadvantages: Hence, using data requires a bit of precaution. ....
    Only when you have understood the data, believe it, and have it cleaned up can you finally start to analyze the data. With a bit of luck, you may even get to the point where you improve something on the shop floor with the help of the data. Now, go out, understand, verify, and clean your data to understand your shop floor, and organize your industry!

    Closed loop, Feedback loop, PDCA
    The highest maturity level is aligning the vision mission with what is happening. The feedback, verification of results with intentions, goals, is the beating heart of
    real lean using PDCA. (Plan-Do-Check-Act). BIDM
    This rather provocative seeing a maturity level for BI analytics. The highest level has nothing with a DWH, Data-lake as fundament. BI analytics is integrated or not in the business process can strongly affect the decision making process. Hence, we consider this category to be a very important one when delimiting a maturity stage
    1. initiation
      user driven - activity initiated by the user,
      process driven - activity initiated by a process
    2. process integration
      data centric - BI analytics is usually supported by a data warehouse,
      process centric - BI analytics is integrated in the business processes
    3. processing model (store and analyze; analyze and store)
    4. event stream processing
    5. "closed-loop" environment
    Business Intelligence Development Model

    Although having the mindset set for BI (Business Intelligence) it is very generic.

    😲 Asthonising, seeing the narrow relationships:
    real lean - operations research - closed loops - systems thinking.


    Seen Gaps for ideas, improvement proposals
    The list of the usually seen gaps 🕳👁❗ to note and improve:
    Solution proposal 💡❗✅ a useful method and practice:

    A-1.3.4 Getting metrics in administrative/cyber processes
    bianl valuestream
    What are interactions in managing operations?
    Core business process, brings value (positive or negative)
    There is a value stream. Follow the link 👓 at the figure for elaboration.
    Information is not equal by type, it can be:
    ALC-V2, BI&A the Analytical plane
    As long there is no mesh experience (closed loop environment) an classic DWH (data lake) should be used for the needed analyses, reporting.
    State of art, most used: Follow the link at for elaboration 👓:
    Business Intelligence Process
    A first improvement to do is improving analytical metrics using well defined sensors.
    Using Sensors Metrics, events, data, information, metrics are needed for: There are several kind of metrics, they can describe: ❓A question: where are the accountable, responsible, informed persons?
    Process oriented analytics closed loops, value stream
    The focus only at the information for an administrative/cyber product in ae value stream.
    Looking at what needs to be done: The mindset for a transformation process "code" "application", in a figure:
    lean process transformations by tools
    The focus in the value stream is a duality: Both viewpoints need a holistic approach because they are highly related and depended.
    Follow the link 👓 at the figure for elaboration.

    Confused-2

    A-1.4 Reference question: Where to change?

    Managing systems and changing systems are different levels of control. When changing systems the complexity on what should be done increases, it is about unpredictable non-linearity. The biggest problem with that is the human demand of anything should be predictable and linear. Challenges for change:
    1. Recognizing the "status quo" becomes the problem
    2. Controlled improvements by autonomy in activities
    3. Controlled improvements by autonomy on construction
    4. Ideas & Initiations for new type of activities
    5. Ideas & Initiations for new type of constructions

    A-1.4.1 Optimizing systems by lines in functions
    Lean: physical - administrative/cyber (differences)
    The Toyota Production System (TPS) is a well known example of lean manufacturing that many want to copy as their lean process. Toyota Production System
    is an integrated socio-technical system, developed by Toyota, that comprises its management philosophy and practices. The TPS is a management system that organizes manufacturing and logistics for the automobile manufacturer, including interaction with suppliers and customers. The system is a major precursor of the more generic "lean manufacturing". Taiichi Ohno and Eiji Toyoda, Japanese industrial engineers, developed the system between 1948 and 1975.
    Originally called "just-in-time production", it builds on the approach created by the founder of Toyota, Sakichi Toyoda, his son Kiichiro Toyoda, and the engineer Taiichi Ohno. The principles underlying the TPS are embodied in The Toyota Way.
    Doing a copycat of how Toyota did and does te work is not the path to succes. Too often (car) manufacturing TPS is assumed what is lean about. The system as a whole is what it is really. Marketing, sales and Administration is done in a virtual cyber world. Once upon a time that was associated with paper-work.
    Confusing is When the product itself is not Tangible but also intangible wat was paper-work. What do you see for the value stream, product flow? See the figures, there is a 👓 link for details.
    Cyber Virtual: Pull request -> push delivery Physical: Pull request -> push delivery
    The result is a risk challenge by vagueness, to differentiate: 💣 Technically running BI & Analytics are using ICT processes very similar to product processes when the core product process is administrative/cyber. Everything is code logic and everything is data, but not all are equal for business value.
    Delivering data products in a cycle
    When you want to process information in a value stream, going for the best quality best performance, than you are in the operational plane being supported by analytics for the understanding in what is going on. The maturity level of the supporting analytics is a challenge on his own.
    A data driven processing approach is by a complete cycle with interactions between states. The interactions can be a transformation or a validation on validity for the flow part of the value stream.
    Jabes generic process
    A figure:
    See right side

    Starting at the bottom right side, there are four stages:
    1. Ideate - Asses
    2. Enable - Plan
    3. Demand - Backend
    4. Frontend - Delivery

    Typical characteristics: The control postion, Plan enable, is at the bottom left not at the top of this cycle. A push is at the top left to rihgt, the pull right to left at the bottom.
    There is a clear segregation between tooling and the functional logic, algorithm.
    A-1.4.2 Controls metrics lines in functions
    ⚖ System, organisation design
    The need for controls and metrics is not a surprising one neither a new modern insight. In the physical technical engineering world it is cornerstone for automation. For only managing the control - measure feedback there is a theory with many practical realisations. PID controller
    For modelling business processes with the goal of understanding value streams. An old (1980's) but valid modelling approach: idef0 (process model) IDEF0 is a method designed to model the decisions, actions, and activities of an organization or system. IDEF0 was derived from a well-established graphical language, the Structured Analysis and Design Technique (SADT). ...
    Effective IDEF0 models help to organize the analysis of a system and to promote good communication between the analyst and the customer. IDEF0 is useful in establishing the scope of an analysis, especially for a functional analysis. As a communication tool, IDEF0 enhances domain expert involvement and consensus decision-making through simplified graphical devices. As an analysis tool, IDEF0 assists the modeler in identifying what functions are performed, what is needed to perform those functions, what the current system does right, and what the current system does wrong. ....
    IDEF0 concepts designed to enhance communication include the following:
    idef0 process model
    in a figure:
    See right side

    Note the line for:
    When the mechanisms direction would be reverted and had the name of metrics ...
    What happened to the control and metrics in the administrative/cyber world ❓

    ⚒ Administrative/cyber: Data Mesh, data product quantum
    Not knowing what is going on is bad. The huge build environment for BI&A reporting: DWH, Data warehouse, Data Lake, Data Lake House with ETL ELT. This is a bizar approach not known, not seen in lean agile.
    ❽ 💡❗✅ Simplify operational monitoring in the analytical plane.
    From: "Data Mesh Delivering Data-Driven Value at Scale" (book 2020), the data (product) quantum. 🎯 Add a control connection at each transformation process. The control regulator for: speed, safety.
    Data mesh- data product
    A figure:
    See right side

    This idea solves BI&A in an analytical plane.

    Note the lines for:
    This is a moment in time for a change in the information processing approach.

    ⚙ Administrative/cyber: Data Mesh, Experience plane
    Not using available information on what is going on is bad. The huge cost and efforts for building environments supporting BI&A reporting: DWH, Data warehouse, Data Lake, Data Lake House with ETL ELT. This is a bizar approach not known, not seen in lean agile.
    ❾ 💡❗✅ Simplify operational dashboarding & feedback controls using the analytical plane. From: "Data Mesh Delivering Data-Driven Value at Scale" (book), the mesh experience.
    The idea: An analytical plane Although this analsytical plane is not weel defined the intention for BI&A is obvious. 🎯 Add dashboarding, mesh experience, for controlling the processes in speed, safety, capacity.
    Data mesh- data policies
    A figure:
    See left side

    A moment in time for a change in approach ❗

    In all this technology focus driven solutions there a is gap left: KM Knowledge Management. The gap is not only the thinking but also in the technological support for KM. A proposal for processes, functional algorithms, safety, risks, decisions and more: use Jabes to create and collect all of that kind of information.

    A-1.4.3 ALC-V3 model, sensors metrics - controls
    ⚖ feed back & control loops
    There are several approaches for developing designing systems. It varies from doing some things by good feelings to very intensive research with controlees loop-backs for good-regulators and knowledge assurance of what and why choices are made and has been made.
    The ALC-V3 model is the most sophisticated approach for processes, value streams. The differences with the other two more simple process models are: Human control and human accountabality is for all these process model the same.
    bp_lifedev03.jpg
    In a figure:
    See right side

    Follow the link for elaboration 👓.
    ALC-V3
    In the ALC-V3 model the process line has at least two lines. The development line:
    1. Retrieval and preparation of information. The structure is logically a star schema.
    2. Reducing the prepared information in an renormalised format.
    3. Developing and a first verification of the code "model" by analysing the results.
    4. Doing a continuous verification of the "model" by analysing the results.
    The operational line has:
    1. Retrieval and preparation of information. The structure is logically a star schema.
    2. Reducing the prepared information in an renormalised format.
    3. Executing using the code "model - scoring".
    4. Distributing the results "model - scoring".
    Note the introduction of the word "model" where previous the "code" or "program" was used for functionality. Follow the link for elaboration 👓 AlC-V3

    ⚙ managing the ALC-V3 line
    The quality of the process line is more complex to manage. analytics proces
    There are different type of personalities in this involved. Developing is very different to operations where the accountability gets a more important role.
    A-1.4.4 A living cycloid information system model
    Document request & functional accountabilities
    KM Knowledge management for the functionality is a process in his own with the goal. To get covered by documented knowledge in a portfolio are risk assessments: This is awareness of the Situation with a Rreqeust. The portfolio options should have been defined during architecting engineering - development and operations. By not having a generic tool covering this, it is mostly either ignored, forgotten or lost in the portfolio connection. During reviews what is going on there is a moment for KM corrections.
    Jabes process Assurance
    In a figure:
    See left side


    Data contracts, knowing the bill of amterials for value streams
    These are the Inputs enabling the goal with materials retrieval: Jabes process Assurance
    A figure:
    See left side

    Portfolio defined transformations by value streams
    These are the Activities realised by some ALC methodology.
    The Alc-V3 approach is the most complete and most complex one.
    Data contracts, fullfilling the goals of value streams
    These are the Results of the system, the goal with the delivery.
    Jabes process Assurance
    A figure:
    See left side

    Service agreements, portfolio alignment
    There are several moments in the value stream with a "customer" contact:
    Although the process is often seen as just four steps those steps that verifying the validity and acceptability are as important.
    A different set of ordered questions: Where How What Which When Who.
    Operations

    A-1.5 Reference question: when to change?

    Managing systems and changing systems are different levels of control. When changing systems the complexity on what should be done increases, it is about unpredictable non-linearity. The biggest problem with that is the human demand of anything should be predictable and linear. Challenges for change:
    1. Minimizing the "status quo" in activities and constructions
    2. A culture in aligned autonomy with feedback for activities
    3. A culture in aligned autonomy with feedback on constructions
    4. In control for Initiations new type of activities
    5. In control for Initiations new type of constructions

    A-1.5.1 Pre-requisite: insight from context to details
    Agentic Ai Engineering
    Prereq: insight from context to details
    Using the hype of AI there are agents that are surrogates for human thinking. Just see them as surrogates and notice the innovating change of how to think. Agentic AI Engineering: The Blueprint for Production-Grade AI Agents (YiZhou 2025)
    What I've learned is this: the difference between a clever demo and a reliable AI agent comes down to engineering rigor. Prompt hacks and intuition alone won't cut it. Building agents that actually work requires systematic thinking, how they manage context, structure decisions, choose the right models, operate safely, and earn user trust. That's why I'm sharing a practical framework we've developed through hands-on experience. Agentic AI Engineering, a five-part discipline that includes:
    1. Context Engineering: Feeding the model the right information at the right time
      Feeding the Brain Without Overloading it. Imagine dropping your smartest team member into a meeting with no agenda, 400 pages of random notes, and the expectation to "just figure it out." That's what most AI agents face when we naively shove too much, too little, or the wrong kind of information into an LLM prompt. Context Engineering is the discipline of designing exactly what the agent sees at each step and how.
      • System Instructions: What role is the agent playing? What goals or rules is it following?
      • User Input: The immediate request or command
      • Short-Term Memory: Recent steps, dialogue, or actions taken
      • Long-Term Memory: Persisted facts, preferences, or prior outcomes
      • Retrieved Knowledge: Relevant docs, data, or facts pulled from external sources
      • Tool Definitions & Outputs: APIs, calculators, functions and their most recent results
      Every call to the model is like giving it a briefing packet. Context Engineering is about curating that packet for relevance, clarity, and completeness. ...
      They remember what they've done, learn what worked, and bring forward only what matters next. Context Engineering makes this possible through:
      • Memory mechanisms (short- and long-term)
      • Context pruning (dropping stale or irrelevant info)
      • Dynamic injection (pulling in new data only when needed)
      It's not static prompting. It's interactive context architecture.
    2. Workflow Engineering: Structuring agent behavior into reliable multi-step processes
      Don't Ask the AI to Do the Whole Job in One Breath.
      Let's say you hire a brilliant intern and ask them to: "Read 300 pages of policy docs, find inconsistencies, write a summary, draft a recommendation, and send it to legal... all before lunch." That intern would fail, not because they’re incapable, but because you gave them a monolithic task with no structure. The same mistake happens all the time in agentic AI. Agentic Workflow Engineering is the antidote. It's the discipline of structuring complex tasks into modular, multi-step processes, where each step has:
      • A clear objective
      • The right context
      • The right tools
      • And well-defined handoffs to the next step
      Workflow engineering gives them that frame. Break down a task like this, Loop until complete:
      1. Understand the goal
      2. Ask clarifying questions
      3. Plan subtasks
      4. Call tools
      5. Evaluate results
      6. Adjust strategy
      7. Generate final output
      Instead of trying to “solve” the whole problem at once, we sequence and scaffold the agent’s reasoning.
    3. Model Engineering: Selecting or tuning the right models for each task
      Pick the Right Brain for the Job Imagine building a Formula 1 car and installing a jet engine, or worse a lawnmower motor. One's too much power with no control; the other simply can't keep up. That's what it's like when you pick the wrong AI model for your agent.
      AI Model Engineering is the craft of choosing (and sometimes shaping) the right brain for every task your agent needs to perform. It's about balancing performance, cost, latency, and specialization and doing so with precision.
    4. AgenticOps: Testing, monitoring, securing, and optimizing agents in production.
      Run Agents Like You Run Critical Enterprise Apps. Building an agent that works in the lab is easy. Building one that works in production, under load, with
      real users,
      real tools,
      real deadlines and doesn't crash, hallucinate, or go rogue, is a different game entirely. It's the discipline of operationalizing AI agents so they are observable, testable, governable, performant, and safe at scale.
      This is where agent development shifts from prompt-tweaking to platform thinking.
      Context engineering feeds the brain (1) and workflow engineering structures its logic (2) , AgenticOps gives that brain a body, a nervous system, and a safety harness (4).
      AgenticOps is the emerging operational layer for agentic systems, think of it as MLOps meets DevOps, adapted for autonomous agents. It includes:
      • Evaluation (evals): Measuring quality, behavior, and correctness
      • Observability: Logging every decision, tool call, and model response
      • Guardrails: Enforcing policy, compliance, and ethical boundaries
      • Security: Preventing injection attacks, abuse, or data leaks
      • Optimization: Improving latency, throughput, and cost at runtime
      • Lifecycle Management: Versioning, rollback, CI/CD, and agent drift monitoring
      If you’re building a system where agents act on your behalf, make decisions, or touch customer-facing systems — AgenticOps isn’t optional.
      The first principle of AgenticOps is this: Never ship an agent you haven’t tested thoroughly in simulation. Unlike traditional software, agents operate probabilistically. Same input, different output. That means we need new testing techniques.
    5. Agentic UX: Designing interfaces that make AI actions transparent, controllable, and trusted.
      Designing for Trust, Transparency, and Teamwork Let’s say you’ve built the world’s most advanced AI agent. It reasons flawlessly, orchestrates tools like a pro, never oversteps its boundaries, and runs on a finely tuned stack, but then you launch it users don’t trust it. They hesitate, they override its suggestions, or worse they abandon it entirely. That’s not a technical failure, that’s a UX failure.
    These are in the order of What How Where Who When. Just add the Which for the decision to be made to complete the set of six. That is the structured way of engineering stuff.
    A-1.5.2 Pre-requisite: insight for appropiate maturity
    Maturity in AI scaling
    Using the hype of AI there are agents that are surrogates for human thinking. Just see them as surrogates and notice the innovating change of how to think.
    Applying the CMM maturity 1 to 5 for Agentic AI. Why Traditional EA Collapses at Scale (Jesper Lowgren 2025)
    Agentic Ai Engineering

    What EA 4.0 Does Differently: Static diagrams and periodical roadmaps are no longer suffice. This shift becomes undeniable at higher levels of AI maturity, where AI agents begin acting with autonomy, multi-agent systems emerge, and decision-making escapes the neat confines of pre-written business rules.
    Beyond AI maturity level 2, traditional enterprise architecture breaks. Not because it’s wrong, but because it was never designed for this kind of
    reality.
    For the CMM maturity level there are claims of organisations achieved level-5. Others say we never even reached level-2 or just being at that for the discipline of information processing. I am convinced it is that situation. Autonomy is a topic well known in Lean. Real lean has a lot of problems in acceptance. In the Agentic AI Maturity Model, Level 3 marks the point where AI systems shift from tool-like augmentation to autonomous execution. This means: This level is not about pilot projects or proof-of-concept sandboxes. It’s about production-grade systems that require
    real trust, scalable control, and architectural resilience.

    Hurdle achieving Level3 AI maturity
    What is holding the discipline of information processing becoming more mature?
    Traditional enterprise architecture was designed for environments that are: Interesting: that "Document-centric" argument mentions the
    real problem of many disperse tools. There is no consistent standard, no tool supporting the standard(s).
    But maturity level 3 breaks these assumptions: Risk management is including the understanding of distributions of events, the normal distribution is not normal. The limits of rules … (David Snowden 2025) Agentic Ai Engineering
    A shortlist of the change from what was done as always into a new paradigm of nonlinearity and not full predictability.
    It is the cynefin framework area of complex problems.
    A-1.5.3 Mindsets: philosophy for changing systems
    The inventor role in a system
    While diplomats act within existing structures, working to preserve stability, inventors are more often the ones who bend the arc of what's structurally possible.
    Their role could be seen through these lenses: Philosophical Snapshot: Inventor as a Liminal Agent, between idea and impact—a role both visionary and unsettling. Not quite political, not entirely scientific—they often occupy a third space. Like mystics or prophets in older societies, they speak a language before it becomes mainstream.
    The typology of system agents
    These system agents are a kind of conceptual cast of characters, each playing a distinct role in how systems evolve, stabilize, or transform. Think of it as the dramaturgy of complex systems. They’re roles of influence, a person can play multiple agents across time or simultaneously.
    The systemic context: economic, ecological, informational, institutional, determines which agents are empowered or marginalized. System agents typologies:
    Agent type Core Function Orientation Signature trait Example Figures
    Prophet Envision alternate futures Horizon-expanding Disrupts imagination boundaries Buckminster Fuller,
    Ursula K. Le Guin
    Trickster Subvert rules playfully Fractal-breaker Reveals cracks in systems Marcel Duchamp,
    hackers
    Inventor Create new structures Future-facing Catalyzes novelty Leonardo da Vinci,
    Hedy Lamarr
    Philosopher Reflect & reframe Meta-systemic Interrogates assumptions Hannah Arendt,
    Niklas Luhmann
    Diplomat Mediate between systems Present-stabilizing Bridges differences Kofi Annan,
    Talleyrand
    Cartographer Map system terrain Knowledge-organizing Makes complexity legible Systems analysts,
    theorists
    Healer Restore systemic health Entropic rebalancer Mends what’s been fragmented Social workers,
    conflict mediators
    Custodian Preserve cultural/systemic memory Conserving Protects continuity Archivists,
    tradition-keepers
    Operator Run and optimize systems Inner-loop Ensures functional reliability Logistics engineers,
    administrators

    Some individuals or collectives operate between types. These agents challenge typologies themselves, reminding us systems aren’t static diagrams but living topologies.
    Mapping roles Into the VSM (Viable Systems Model):
    Shape Design 9-plane
    “Strategic Shaping” - “Concept Design”
    In an orientation from inside to outside. From inside to outside the question is how to be adaptive to the external environment, other systems.
    The used terms for the figure with a quadrant are basically two pillars.
    1. Mediation & Innovation
      Enterprise Architecture
    2. Operations Research
      Systems Thinking
    It are the transformations in between that are as important as the subjects. The result is not a quadrant but a nine-plane.
    It captures: The diagonals are the ones that are dichotomies and are dichotomies.
    The 9-plane is a simplification from the six*six reference area. Several disciplines, usual four, are connected to a 3-dimensional construction where the time is an important aspect.
    A-1.5.4 Mindsets: methodogies for changing systems
    Using reference frameworks, a special case of discipline
    Getting attention, getting funding is starting with a top down approach for what to do. The Shift in Enterprise Architecture starting with a reference framework. The fundamental ideas didn't change although there were changes made. The Zachman Framework Evolution
    Zachman Feac BPM (v3)
    The horizontal axis is now ordered. The order is relevant for the interactions limiting a model in all possible interactions. The nature of a grid like this is non linearity because every cell is acting on his own way. Any idea of simple linear activities by causality should be avoided.

    Using reference frameworks, a generic approach
    Enabling a bottom up and top down in how to do is requiring several references for the involved different disciplines. It is the vertical axis that got specialised words. The classic where: Context, Concept, System logic, Technology logic, Tool components, Operations instance. Zachman Lucid abstracted
    Using this in a ver technical approach was done in creating the SQL implemntation at IBM with involvement of Zachman. See C-1.4.2 Design abstractions, John A. Zachman". That is an area where attention, getting funding is an exception for innovations.
    Frictions by fractals bottom top -top down, internal- external
    Understanding systems, portfolio, products, is documenting that using a standard. Pitiful a standard for that missing, everybody is left to do that by his own way. How should you do documentation? The Documentation Habit Your Future Self Will Thank You For (A.Ponomarev 2025)
    Too much documentation can be overwhelming. Long and complex documents can make people skim through the content, overlooking details or entirely skipping them.
    Too little documentation can be just as bad. The lack of instructions can lead to assumptions. And assumptions can lead to errors.
    The best approach is to keep documentation lightweight, clear, and searchable. Instead of writing massive documents, focus on what teams actually need. Try to keep your documentation: Remember, good documentation answers questions before they’re asked. It should guide engineers without forcing them to dig through endless pages.
    Shared knowledge should be a helpful tool, not a burden.

    Structuring the documentation of activities and products
    If we would have a standard reference frameworks for all involved disciplines, what would be the best option for doing the documentation, archiving the knowledge? DBMS Scheme for project engineering (R Noronha 2025) Engineering projects are often large and complex endeavours that generate lots of data. This data can include the dates document are issued, time spent performing activities, quality compliance checks, commodities etc.
    Managing this data is crucial in effectively managing the project.
    However there are few database systems designed to cater specifically engineering projects. In a typical engineering project, disparate data management systems are combined together to manage the data. For example, there may be a payroll processing system to log time, a project management tool to track activities, and a document control package to manage deliverables. The issue with this methodology is that it would not capture the relationship that each of these databases have with each other, which can lead to inefficiencies such as data duplication or inconsistent data.
    Often, with no other better alternatives to capture project data, managers have to resort to using Excel spreadsheets. While Excel is a good tool to capture simple tabular data, when it comes to non-trivial data Excel often falls short. It is very difficult to model relationships in Excel.
    This is where relational databases shine.

    Confused-2

    A-1.6 Maturity 3: Controlled Operational Revisions

    "Managing technology service" is a prerequisite for "processes: cyber/administrative". The focus should be on the value stream processes, frontend backend. Optimizing the technology service is operating, execution of lean.
    The distractor is starting by the technology connection.
    From the three TIP, Bianl interrelated scopes:
    A-1.6.1 A generic reference framework per discipline
    The reference structure 6w1h in a six*six frame
    The reference structure as generic structure is simple in a presentation and very complicated for the context by information it can present. What has happened to that frame of references of Zachman where the references (metadata) for a discipline has to be defined? A long lasting issue is connecting Business & Technology (operations).
    There has been a lot of attention for this issue. It started with Henderson & Venkatraman Strategic Alignment Model (SAM) in a quadrant (1993). That got an extension into the 9-plane 2000 by Rik Maes. Redefining business: IT alignment through a unified framework . That redefining to a unified framework approach failed.
    The quest for a unified framework
    For some reason all what has been presented as the solution are not what it has meant to be.
    What could be the problem? For a standard: What is a “Standard” in Business and Technology? (S.Holcman 2025) takeaways:
    Other values for process improvement to consider
    Russell Ackoff on Systems Thinking in Organizations (D.Meyer 2025) why quality and continuous improvement programs often fail, the need for vision and "discontinuous improvement," and the fundamental importance of systems thinking classic 1994 presentation by renowned systems scientist, Dr. Russell Ackoff (1919-2009) Key points: Dr. Russell Ackoff (who knew Deming) speaks about why most continuous improvement initiatives fail, the need for vision and "discontinuous improvement," and the fundamental importance of systems thinking. The essential or defining properties of a system (e.g., organizational performance) are properties of the whole system, which none of its parts have. A hand severed from a body cannot write. No function within an organization alone can deliver products to customers. A system is not the sum of the behaviors of its parts; it's a product of their interactions. An architect is a good example of a systems thinking. They design the house; then they design the rooms within the house. They may modify the house to improve the quality of the rooms; but they never do so unless it simultaneously improves the quality of the house. That's a fundamental principle of systems improvement.
    Until managers take into account the systemic nature of organizations, most of their efforts to improve performance are doomed to failure.

    A-1.6.2 Regulations: technicals & functionals
    Compliancy risk management:
    Although there are no direct regulations on the technology at this moment, there are many regulations to comply by organisations. The topics for those regulations are mostly similar Confidentiality Integrity Availability (CIA). The result of a BIA analyses for CIA levels should be verifiable.
    💡❗✅ For process requirements & design use Jabes to collect all information:
    These are having impact on:
    Forces in the organsisation an abstraction:
    From the overhauled strategy alignment model (SAMO) a result is:
    three pillars for every type of activities. There are three levels to orchestrate for the
    realisation:

    dtap layers application
    In a figure:
    See right side

    The words "Shape" "Serve" are clear in their intention. The word "Steer" didn´t have an immediate association. Steer synonyms alternatives:
    Abstraction of forces in the organsisation:
    There are more lines of power in an organisation. Some of those:
    1. Financial based management. Goal: profits at least enough budget for tasks.
    2. Core business. Goal: Fullfilling the operations for tasks of the organisation.
    3. Green fields. Goal: Improvement, product research, customer relations.
    💣 The powers are not equally balanced The core business (operations) is the line having commonly the least influence at strategic level. The result of that could be (risk) a total loss of all tasks the business was positioned to do.
    💡 A proposal for a generic approach for balancing powers. CEO The responsibilities of an organization´s CEO are set by the organization´s board of directors or other authority, depending on the organization´s structure.
    They can be far-reaching or quite limited, and are typically enshrined in a formal delegation of authority regarding business administration. Typically, responsibilities include being an active decision-maker on business strategy and other key policy issues, leader, manager, and executor.
    The communicator role can involve speaking to the press and to the public, as well as to the organization´s management and employees; the decision-making role involves high-level decisions about policy and strategy. The CEO is tasked with implementing the goals, targets and strategic objectives as determined by the board of directors.

    A-1.6.3 Maturity fundaments optimizing 'Cyber/administrative'
    Maturity 'Cyber/administrative' Basic organisation
    What has always been done at BPM approaches is thinking in three layers. For these three layers looking at the anatomy of the components, claiming when the anatomy is changed the physiology will magically become what was intended for the change. The aspect for the interactions, the neurology of the system ignored.
    Improvement aspects
    All the maturity in distinct layers for:

    👓 click for Jabes maturity organisation.

    The deviation to classic BPM is not going for a siloed BPM approach but: Answering the why is the repeating ever lasting curiosity for the system as a whole. Instead of three layers going for four (STIP) ⚒ S Leadership (Command & Control).

    Periodizing the technology system or the enablement of the technology
    The common loophole is starting with technology and ignoring the enablement of technology usage.
    Maturity 'Cyber/administrative' Attention Points
    Attention points for maturity level considerations & evaluations:
    Maturity id SubId Source Context
    CMM-4OO-1 OR Enable
    Metrics
    I01 A-1.2 Operations Research into Information processing Process
    I02 A-1.3 Lean Processing into Information technology Process
    P01 A-1.4 Goal technical metrics in ALC-V* streams Process
    P02 A-1.4 Goal functional metrics in ALC-V* streams Process
    P03 A-1.4 Applicable technical sensors in ALC-V* streams Process
    P04 A-1.4 Applicable functional sensors in ALC-V* streams Process
    CMM-4OO-2 Technology
    I03 A-1.2 Understanding of information security Process
    I04 A-1.3 Understanding applicable risk objectives Process
    I05 A-1.2 Understanding impact of decsisons on persons Process
    I06 A-1.3 Understanding of applicable business rules Process
    T01 A-1.4 ALC-V1 serviced by technology understood Technology
    T02 A-1.4 ALC-V2 serviced by technology understood Technology
    T03 A-1.4 ALC-V3 serviced by technology understood Technology
    T04 A-1.4 ALC-V1 functional instructions understood Integrity
    T05 A-1.4 ALC-V2 functional instructions understood Integrity
    T06 A-1.4 ALC-V3 functional instructions understood Integrity
    T07 A-1.4 ALC-V1 information security understood Security
    T08 A-1.4 ALC-V2 information security understood Security
    T09 A-1.4 ALC-V3 information security understood Security
    CMM-4OO-3 Operational
    DMAIC
    P05 A-1.4 Using technical metrics in ALC-V* streams Process
    P06 A-1.4 Using functional metrics in ALC-V* streams Process
    I11 A-1.5.3 Data retrieval process known Integrity
    I12 A-1.5.3 Data sources locations known Technology
    I13 A-1.5.3 Data sources accountability known Integrity
    I14 A-1.5.3 Data sources content quality known Reliability
    I15 A-1.5.3 Data transformation process known Integrity
    I16 A-1.5.3 Data transformation accountability Integrity
    I17 A-1.5.3 Data destinations locations known Technology
    I18 A-1.5.3 Data destinations accountability known Security
    I19 A-1.5.3 Data destinations content quality known Reliability
    I20 A-1.5.3 Data delivery process known Integrity


    The reference structure 6w1h six*six
    💣 The assumption is made task & roles are organized according capabilities in a: hierarchy. There is a conflict: Organizing the organisation is a hierarchical top-down responsibility with the ultimate accountability at the top of pyramid.
    There is a conflict in understanding for technology and delivering a service:
    The engineering order is: What How Where - Who (internal) When Which
    The service order is: Where How What - Which When Who (external)

    This Design Shape chapter:
    The reference structure "Design Shape" as generic structure is simple in a presentation and very complicated for the context by information it can present. The abstraction is organized:
    A-1.6.4 The maturity of: Incentives, Culture, Structure, Resources
    Cerberos dog three heads
    Prioritizing in understanding root causes for failing desired change
    Work to do: solving process improvement issues by their real root-causes. Not being mind blocked by only the technology solutions.
    (N.Dean Meyer) The right way to build high-performance, cross-boundary teamwork is to get to fundamentals. Find out why the nice people in your organization don't team, and then address the root causes of incentives, culture, structure, and the internal economy. See also: "E-1.3.1 Recognizing the 3M evils"
    Prioritizing solving root causes for failing desired change
    Maturity id SubId Source Context
    CMM-4OO
    -0-Muda
    Waste
    ORRM-1 A-1.2 Promote get strategical support for feed-back loops OR Conceptual
    ORRM-2 A-1.2 Get support & implement operational feed-back loops Conceptual
    ORRM-3 A-1.2 Get support & implement tactical feed-back loop Conceptual
    ORRM-3 A-1.2 Get support & implement strategical feed-back loop Conceptual
    MCRM-1 A-1.3.1 Avoid micro management Conceptual
    MCRM-2 A-1.3.1 Empower staff using real Lean Conceptual
    CYBR-1 A-1.4 A-1.5 Cyber mindset staff, no physical artefacts Conceptual
    CYBR-2 A-1.4 A-1.5 Cyber mindset to value streams Conceptual
    STRC-1 A-1.3.3 A-1.4 Functional Sensors information value stream Structural
    STRC-2 A-1.3.3 A-1.4 Technical Sensors information value stream Structural
    STRC-3 A-1.3.3 A-1.4 Functional Metrics information value stream Structural
    STRC-4 A-1.3.3 A-1.4 Technical Metrics information value stream Structural
    RACI-1 A-1.5 Clear accountabilities responsibilities value stream Conceptual
    RACI-2 A-1.2.2 Tasks, roles, aligned to accountabilities. Conceptual
    CMM-4OO
    -0-Mura
    Uneveness
    ORRM-1 A-1.2 Promote get strategical support for feed-back loops OR Conceptual
    ORRM-2 A-1.2 Get support & implement operational feed-back loops Conceptual
    ORRM-3 A-1.2 Get support & implement tactical feed-back loop Conceptual
    ORRM-3 A-1.2 Get support & implement strategical feed-back loop Conceptual
    MCRM-1 A-1.3.1 Avoid micro management Conceptual
    MCRM-2 A-1.3.1 Empower staff using real Lean Conceptual
    CYBR-1 A-1.4 A-1.5 Cyber mindset staff, no physical artefacts Conceptual
    CYBR-2 A-1.4 A-1.5 Cyber mindset to value streams Conceptual
    STRC-1 A-1.3.3 A-1.4 Functional Sensors information value stream Structural
    STRC-2 A-1.3.3 A-1.4 Technical Sensors information value stream Structural
    STRC-3 A-1.3.3 A-1.4 Functional Metrics information value stream Structural
    STRC-4 A-1.3.3 A-1.4 Technical Metrics information value stream Structural
    RACI-1 A-1.5 Clear accountabilities responsibilities value stream Conceptual
    RACI-2 A-1.2.2 Tasks, roles, aligned to accountabilities. Conceptual
    CMM-4OO
    -0_Muri
    irrationality
    ORRM-1 A-1.2 Promote get strategical support for feed-back loops OR Conceptual
    ORRM-2 A-1.2 Get support & implement operational feed-back loops Conceptual
    ORRM-3 A-1.2 Get support & implement tactical feed-back loop Conceptual
    ORRM-3 A-1.2 Get support & implement strategical feed-back loop Conceptual
    MCRM-1 A-1.3.1 Avoid micro management Conceptual
    MCRM-2 A-1.3.1 Empower staff using real Lean Conceptual
    CYBR-1 A-1.4 A-1.5 Cyber mindset staff, no physical artefacts Conceptual
    CYBR-2 A-1.4 A-1.5 Cyber mindset to value streams Conceptual
    STRC-1 A-1.3.3 A-1.4 Functional Sensors information value stream Structural
    STRC-2 A-1.3.3 A-1.4 Technical Sensors information value stream Structural
    STRC-3 A-1.3.3 A-1.4 Functional Metrics information value stream Structural
    STRC-4 A-1.3.3 A-1.4 Technical Metrics information value stream Structural
    RACI-1 A-1.5 Clear accountabilities responsibilities value stream Conceptual
    RACI-2 A-1.2.2 Tasks, roles, aligned to accountabilities. Conceptual


    The mind set change to facilitating
    These attributes are about culture, enabling the workforce for the technical and administrative components. Have the requirements for adequate tooling in place an let the workforce do their work.
    🔰 Contents Frame-ref OR Forest Metrics DO LSS CMM3-4OO 🔰
      
    🚧  TIP Risk O-ALC Gemba Stations DO PDCA CMM4-4OO 🚧
      
    🎯 101-IS VM-VMs Ideate-EE Plan-EE DO-4OO CMM5-4OO 🎯


    A-2 Improving enterprises design & value streams


    dual feeling

    A-2.1 Frictions for changing what always was done

    Analysing systems, designing systems, architecting enterprises (What) has constraints. For systems there is a resistance to change, homeostasis. All systems are part of something greater where change is certain. Failing to adapt to change can break systems.
    🚧 Those constraints include: This is about: Volatility, Uncertainty, Complexity, and Ambiguity
    A-2.1.1 Frictions by management wanting control by causation
    Project management, a brief history full of frictions
    There is long history doing projects in the administrative/cyber world. Administrative/cyber projects for intangible systems still have no solid foundation.
    Cubicles office
    Software crisis a brief history
    For managing software: The retro perspective for this: What did change since those years?
    ❓ A-2.1.2 Gaps for understanding requirements to identifications
    Learning from experiences - leaders in a hype
    Context: Agile, disappointments an example of failing solving frictions. This should no discussion topic, but it is. Bad experiences are not used to analyse and solved, the human reaction is a going into a blame game. Instead the whole approach is getting blamed and replaces with a new one with similar shortcomings.
    A review by one of the persons promoting agile, aglity, "what was the Agile hype" (2025) Jim Highsmith, in a retro perspective. For this article, I´ll focus on agile disappointments, but skip over the rhetoric. ..
    👉🏾 So, I offer six candidates for the root cause of disappointments with agile that hopefully embody this constructive debate sentiment:
    These first three options are about balance in executing the next three are about enablers culture:
    Conclusions
    In wrapping up this nuanced landscape of agile disappointments, let´s remember that the journey toward agility is as diverse as the individuals and organizations embarking on it. The challenges range from spreading capabilities too thin to navigating the tricky balance between performance and people. Yet, amidst these trials, the underlying message is clear, learning from our setbacks, rather than labeling them as failures.
    Agile is not a one-size-fits-all solution but a mindset that encourages adapting and evolving. It invites us to embrace change, question our assumptions, and continuously seek improvement.
    So, as we reflect on our agile experiences, let's hold onto the notion that every disappointment carries the seeds of knowledge and growth. After all, in the grand tapestry of our agile journeys, each thread of challenge is interwoven with opportunities for learning, innovation, and, ultimately, transformation.

    In the irony of the blame debate in the Agile hype, this is nice sum-up to learn from.
    Learning from experiences - doers in a hype
    Doers in presenting their knowedge in a pdocast serie: episode "NN 0097, Unmanaged - Jack Skeels - Murray Robinson - Shane Gibson" Following agile product development critics on what is not going as promised (2024 book review). unmanaged
    Unmanaged: A Deep Dive into Agile Mismanagement
    (JS) Unmanaged is a book that comes from my biggest observation, which is Agile is getting applied everywhere. And the single common denominator that I could see through all the failed Agile implementations, ...
    👉🏾 but they wouldn't change anything about the way they manage the organization. ...
    (MR)I've been on both sides of the fence, client side and service provider side. My observation is that most clients these days are saying they want to be agile, but 90 percent of clients that claim to be agile are far from it. And all of the service providers are saying that they are agile. And 99 percent of service providers are far from it.
    (SG) ... as soon as you hear somebody says we're implementing Agile, that for me is a warning sign. ... it's a culture ...
    Going to the topic it mentions three other reasons seen from the operational level.
    With the previous six others we could put them in a 9 plane as a simplification of a 6*6 matrix.

    ❌ A-2.1.3 Failing in understanding abstraction concepts, two dimensions
    Abstraction scopes in several disciplines
    The 6*6 references by J.Zachman (updated 23/8/2025) his retro perspective on his framework.
    1. The FIRST most important slide I ever created was the “Framework for Enterprise Architecture, the Enterprise Ontology” slide… colloquially> “The Zachman Framework” because this is a description of (the “meta-models” of) the 36 different types of models that are relevant for designing an object, ANY OBJECT.
    The reason this Framework slide is so important is because I didn’t create it… I learned it from Enterprises that designed and manufactured airplanes, computers, coffee pots, garbage cans, etc. plus some personal Architect friends that designed and constructed hundred story buildings, California ranch houses, log cabins, etc.
    1. The Second slide Observations for enterprise design Industrial Age
    1. The Third slide Tangible instead of intangible products Information Age
    🤔 There is that contradiction for a model methodology describing enterprises and that it is about Any Object. The explanation for the thinking framework is strong about any object. That is including by nature intangible information objects. Information objects got created massively in the information age.
    (JAZ) To my knowledge, Alvin Toffler was the first serious academic to address the issue of “change.” He wrote three seminal pieces of work on the subject:
    1. Future Shock 1970
      In “Future Shock” he said, “Knowledge is Change and the ever-increasing body of knowledge feeding the great engine of technology creates ever-increasing change.” This explains the dramatic escalation in the rate of change we are experiencing today and the cautions not to assume any respite looking ahead.
      👉🏾 My observation about the Second Wave: The fundamental concept of the Industrial Age paradigm is technology can be employed to extend human ability to work … that is, technology can perform processes “better, faster and cheaper” than they can be performed manually. Therefore IT justifies the acquisition cost of technology on the number of Full Time Equivalents (FTE’s) an application would displace.
    2. The Third Wave 1980
      ... The flurry of activity in the domain of Artificial Intelligence is evidence of the shifting paradigm, shifting to the 3rd (THIRD)Wave, “The Information Age.”
      👉🏾 My opinion about the Third Wave, the INFORMATION AGE: The fundamental concept of the Information Age paradigm is technology can be employed to extend human ability to THINK … supporting innovation, supporting creativity, supporting disruptive change … that is, assuming that the Enterprise is DESIGNED effectively, eliminating Technical Debt and facilitating CHANGE.
      If you cannot show me the inventory of descriptive representations postulated by the Zachman Framework for Enterprise Architecture, the Enterprise Ontology, I KNOW THE ENTERPRISE IS NOT DESIGNED! And, AI cannot improve the Enterprise design if there is no Enterprise design to improve!
    3. Powershift 1990
      ... What impact knowledge has on decisons by who is missing.
    😲 (JAZ) In fact, as I write this paragraph, I changed my mind … the slide where I developped this “value proposition” is THE MOST IMPORTANT SLIDE I EVER CREATED. The slide proving the Enterprise can be designed iteratively and incrementally while the Enterprise is operating is second, and the Framework slide itself is downgraded to THIRD!
    Reason: because this concept universally dominates EVERY warm body in the Information Technology community if not every live person among ENTERPRISE MANAGEMENT and probably EVERY ACADEMIC institution that teaches or PUBLISHES. … or REVIEWS ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE ARTICLES FOR PUBLICATION, which explains why I had difficulty getting my 3rd Wave articles published in 2nd Wave Academically Acceptable Journals.
    An amazing retro perspective. When the way of communicating knowledge is the needed change, 2nd Wave methodologies need adaptions. The IBM publication .
    Understanding the Zachman framework and the hidden intends.
    It is big mind-shift for getting understanding the essence behind the zachman framework, demoted to the third place in what is important. That is even worse. Most of us are requiring to make money for living, the result is a fall back to methodologies practices where certifications is a market.
    👁 I would like to see more, but only found this:
    Sabsa history It was there that I met John Zachman and listened to his keynote presentation on the Zachman Framewor, the first time I had encountered his work. It was a moment of realisation that what we had in the SABSA layered model was conceptually the same as Zachman’s layers.
    His language was different and he had analysed the layers into six columns, but otherwise it was so similar. I went back to S.W.I.F.T. and reworked the model to align the terminology.
    👁 Contradictions and omissions are in relationships. Stated are rules but hard to find and difficult to intepret. Rules by Zachman (SAP leanix)
    Rule 5: Do not create diagonal relationships between cells.
    Columns can be arranged in any order but should have a top-down order starting with the most significant category. The matrix should provide clear answers to complex questions in this way, and is designed to do so–it will not benefit stakeholders to create diagonal relationships between cells.
    I used Which for Why but the intention is the same the cell for the goal, "Means" (Strategies & Tactics of Column 6) (BR c066 2021 ).
    Notes by JAZ and others showing an evolution
    👁 Architecture Abstractions - a technology scope: Chris Loose used the Zachman framework for T.Codd This is referring the eighties.
    It is not mysterious why the people who build buildings, airplanes, battleships, locomotives, computers, all the Industrial Age products that are sufficiently complex to warrant Architecture came up with that set of description representations. They are answering the six primitive interrogatives that constitute the total set of questions that have to be answered to have a complete description of anything: What, How, Where, Who, When, and Why.
    This goes back about 7,000 years to the origins of language … and by the way, I did not invent this classification. It has been well-exercised by humanity for thousands of years. If you don't answer all six primitive interrogatives it means that your description is incomplete.
    This is really important for engineering work. You are trying to "normalize" each characteristic. There is an engineering cliche, something like "an elegance in simplicity." You want to minimize redundancy except where explicitly controlled because redundancy increases complexity which affects manufacturing, operations, maintenance, performance, costs … the entire spectrum of the existence of the product. The only way to "normalize" the contents of any one Cell of the Framework is to see the total set of occurrences for any one 'abstraction' in the context of the entire object.

    👁 Acceptance and state of art of the thinking framework. Observations on Methodologies (nov 2011)
    My personal opinion is that the information industry state of the art in Rows 1 (Scope) and 2 (Models of the Business) of all Columns as well as all Rows of Columns 4, 5, and 6, (Who, When, and Why) --if there is any state of the art at all-- is still very limited.
    The confusion of five or six rows is mentioned by a choice of including the instantiations or not. This confusion is important for the failing acceptence. In the early setting that 5th row got intepreted for instances. The differnece in tangible instances and intangable ones was only recent added, see the most imporatn slide.
    From the outset, the Framework for Enterprise Architecture --the "Zachman Framework"-- has been comprised of six Columns and five Rows, six Rows if you include the Functioning Enterprise as a Row. It is in Row 6 (the Functioning Enterprise) where instance examples are classified.
    👁 Common Myths About the Zachman Architecture Framework a discussion to some of those (2021) repeat the frictions in understanding.
    The Zachman Framework is abstract because it is the meta model for the knowledgebase that constitutes the design of an Enterprise. That is, if there are no descriptive representations ("models") as prescribed by the Zachman Framework for a given Enterprise, that given Enterprise may exist, but it has never been DESIGNED … however big and complex it may be, it has only happened. The Zachman Framework is simply the same pattern of engineering design artifacts that are created for the production and maintenance of every tangible object that exists with Enterprise names instead of product names.
    Widely misunderstood and misrepresented, the Zachman Architecture Framework is simply a thinking tool, not a methodology. Its fundamentally-neutral position concerning methodology and implementation is the secret to its power and the reason it has proven so enduring. Many aspects of the Framework are misunderstood.

    A-2.1.4 Failing to abstract in many dimensions, most important Time
    Understanding an Enterprise as viable system
    A geographical map of an organisation is reducing the situation to a moment in time. For only three dimensions in a 3D projection that is leaving out some of all of the dimensions and all variety for a system. Just with the focus on: The nine planes are simplified 6*6 matrices but in this used in fractals, subsystems. here are many subsystems each of them to get services by a reference frame. Reference frames that are subsets of the EA reference frame.
    The connections are made in fractals by eight-cycles.
    The question in this is why there are only 4 layers where the 6*6 matrix would suggest there would be 6? The resources to get external and the product/service external are at the sides for interactions. They are interacting only in one direction when there is a flow. Those 4 layers are the ones that have a time dimension in the vertical for the system that are expect to adapt to the externals.
    Build modern01

    A-2.2 Change the position to enabling adaptivity

    Chaos in understanding (How) caused by complexity of systems: Log frames, fractals, the matryoshka metaphor. The simple order of: What How Where question is a chaotic problem. After we understood what issues there are ("What to change") and going into the How to solve those, the first question is again "What to change".
    ⚠ Going into details is handing over to others when the size gets to huge. Challenges by human nature:
    📚 A-2.2.1 Components detailed in contexts
    DIKW - data, information, knowledge, wisdom
    ❓ How to manage something where the knowledge of what when by who is unknown? DIKW_pyramid (wiki)
    The DIKW pyramid, also known variously as the DIKW hierarchy, wisdom hierarchy, knowledge hierarchy, information hierarchy, information pyramid, and the data pyramid, refers loosely to a class of models for representing purported structural and/or functional relationships between data, information, knowledge, and wisdom.
    vmap sdlc Typically: The DIKW acronym has worked into the rotation from knowledge management.

    It demonstrates how the deep understanding of the subject emerges, passing through four qualitative stages:
    The DIKW model is often quoted, or used implicitly, in definitions of data, information and knowledge in the information management, information systems and knowledge management literatures, but there has been limited direct discussion of the hierarchy.
    Reviews of textbooks and a survey of scholars in relevant fields indicate that there is not a consensus as to definitions used in the model, and even less in the description of the processes that transform elements lower in the hierarchy into those above them.
    By the introduction of a common operational picture, data are put into context, which leads to information instead of data. The next step, which is enabled by service-oriented web-based infrastructures (but not yet operationally used), is the use of models and simulations for decision support. Simulation systems are the prototype for procedural knowledge, which is the basis for knowledge quality. Finally, using intelligent software agents to continually observe the battle sphere, apply models and simulations to analyse what is going on, to monitor the execution of a plan, and to do all the tasks necessary to make the decision maker aware of what is going on, command and control systems could even support situational awareness, the level in the value chain traditionally limited to pure cognitive methods.
    David Weinberger argues that although the DIKW pyramid appears to be a logical and straight-forward progression, this is incorrect. "What looks like a logical progression is actually a desperate cry for help." He points out there is a discontinuity between Data and Information (which are stored in computers), versus Knowledge and Wisdom (which are human endeavours). This suggests that the DIKW pyramid is too simplistic in representing how these concepts interact. ...
    👉🏾 "Knowledge is not determined by information, for it is the knowing process that first decides which information is relevant, and how it is to be used."

    Technology mindset or business one question
    The DIKW model as a Cry for help is an opening to review better. The first questions are what is knowledge about and what is wisdom about?
    Wisdom is better to be replaced by insight, the drive for decisions out of choices, the which.
    Knowledge is ambiguous, it can be: The missing's in the DIKW model are the Who and When choices for decisions with insight. It are not really missing's, it are other dimensions of the DIKW model. Instead of oversimplified this visual is overwhelming. It is based on the value stream in segmentations. Applying the DIKW for the good-regulator of viabel systems theory that is controlling the flow in the system, the anatomy of these line becomes more explainable.
    Organisation Boarding good regulator Neuro
    In a figure,
    see right side
    Culture: backend vs frontend
    Culture: Technology vs Functionality
    Split double lines in Data & Information by backend frontend.
    Knowledge in multiple areas each for specific domain.
    Consolidation of the knownledge areas to get insight for wisdom in decisions controlling the value stream.

    Although there are only four visible layers in the way of it is represented there are actual six.
    The similarity to a heart is pure accidental. The knowledge storage areas are part of the brain nervous system as is the insight for decisions.
    🎭 A-2.2.2 Components as a whole in contexts
    Emercence systems
    Emergence a philosopical twist, what is the meaning?
    Changes in the logic of design itself
    CSU_RAE Control Scale Unpredictablity - Rules Autonomy Emergence  Autonomy creates scale, Emergence creates risk Can we architect for both? (L.Lowgren LI) This shift from determinism to autonomy to emergence is not incremental. Determinism gave us control. Autonomy gave us scale. Emergence gives us a new system logic altogether.
    My interpretation is seeing a visual with a 3*3 layout for components and the describing text is about their interactions. Adding and interpreting in that: For understanding not only words will work we need better visuals. Missing in this is the question of values (not only financial ones) The 4th layer on top and time shift to add.

    A digital twin or design of an intangible object
    The system you designed is not the system that runs.
    The problem to solve is if you don't understand the system there is no way to validate the reality of the intangible system vs what is assumed it is.
    The issue to solve first is an understanding of the system. For a intangible system that needs not to be complete any level any point in details can be a starting point.
    Changes in the approach for the logic of design itself
    The change in IT-architecture: What this says is: IT-architecture should move away from practices and from methodologies to become what the meaning of ICT architecture is.
    👐 A-2.2.3 The path to instantions from contexts
    Adaption to the logic of uncertainties
    We are educated for a world of binary logic and exact numeric mathematical formulae. A statement is either true of false, a measurement is an approach with uncertainties of an exact measurable object. This is a very limited approach that is not wat the real nature humans are part of is.
    fuzzy logic in mathematics, a form of logic based on the concept of a fuzzy set. Membership in fuzzy sets is expressed in degrees of truth—i.e., as a continuum of values ranging from 0 to 1. In a narrow sense, the term fuzzy logic refers to a system of approximate reasoning, but its widest meaning is usually identified with a mathematical theory of classes with unclear, or “fuzzy,” boundaries.
    There are two type of uncertainties that should be treated different.
    In 1965 Lotfi Zadeh, an engineering professor at the University of California at Berkeley, proposed a mathematical definition of those classes that lack precisely defined criteria of membership. Fuzziness as defined by Zadeh is nonstatistical in nature, it represents vagueness due to human intuition, not uncertainty in the probabilistic sense. Membership in a fuzzy set is usually represented graphically.
    Membership functions are determined by both theoretical and empirical methods that depend on the particular application, and they may include the use of learning and optimization techniques such as neural networks or genetic algorithms.

    Applying logic of uncertainties, explainable and/or by convention
    The missing of an exact theoretical model does not imply the logic is not understandable. In technical applications, fuzzy control refers to programs or algorithms using fuzzy logic to allow machines to make decisions based on the practical knowledge of a human operator. The fundamental problem of automatic control is that of determining the appropriate response of the system, or production plant, for any given set of conditions. Conventional control techniques are based on explicit mathematical descriptions of the system, typically a set of differential equations involving a small number of variables.
    Fuzzy control, on the other hand, does not require an exact theoretical model but only the empirical knowledge of an experienced operator. This knowledge is then expressed as a set of linguistic rules of the form “if [present conditions], then [action to be taken].”
    It is very good possible the measure things and create an experience model to what is seen. It is called machines learning, data-driven, artifical intelligence.
    Practical applications of fuzzy logic are not restricted to engineering and related fields.

    The late 1990s witnessed the development of hybrid systems, which combine the advantages of two or more computing techniques. So-called neuro-fuzzy systems integrate fuzzy logic and artificial neural networks, enabling a certain form of learning. Systems with neuro-fuzzy components may be found in fields such as stock market prediction, intelligent information systems, and data mining (see database).
    In the late 2020's Large language Models (LLM's) became the solution for almost anything. Asking questions in human language to machines and getting purposeful answers.
    Data science, Process mining, process science
    From: "Want to do a process mining project" slides and videos (vdaalst). How to position process mining in a figure:
    Process mining W.vanAalst, data science - process science
    Words that are being used are changing fast. This is confusing aspect of an immature discipline. Process mining is positioned as an intersection. The used words are "Process discovery". This is only the attempt to understand the existing situation of processes in the system. The next steps would be: Neither of those next steps got mentioned. Two problematic frustrations as issues being mentioned, these are most likely the fundamental blocking issues for those next steps. They should get solved by design of systems:
    📚 A-2.2.4 The path to motivation from materials
    Value streams, processes
    A value stream is the set of actions that take place to add value to a customer from the initial request through realization of value by the customer. ❗ Just focus on the external customer
    Understanding the Fundamentals of Value-Stream Mapping Value-stream mapping (VSM VaSM) is a fundamental lean practice that involves diagramming a value stream, which includes all the actions (value-creating and nonvalue-creating) needed to move a product or service from raw material to the arms of the customer, including the material and information flow.
    That is rather straightforward, well tot understand. From: slides and videos (W vd Aalst). Not all process events will follow the expectation form the values stream, VaSM map. For the simple value stream: a/ Order, b/ Pay, c/ Deliver, d/ Confirm flow there are many possible variations when the details vary. The payment might be at an other moment in the flow or the delivery is split by a verification or the payment and billing got a split. Process mining W.vanAalst
    In a figure:
    See right side


    VSM, VaSM processes, understanding the anatomy
    When there is some awareness on values streams there is soon some anxiety to know what it is about, what is going on. It is a variation of "go and see" (Genchi Genbutsu). I in order to truly understand a situation one needs to observe what is happening at the site where work actually takes place.
    Too complicated: starting with process mining without understanding the VaSM. From: 'Want to do a process mining project' slides and videos (W vd Aalst).
    Many people and organizations contact me to apply process mining. They all have data and processes. However, often the prerequisites of process mining are unclear. On the one hand, process mining is super generic and can be applied in any domain, just like spreadsheets are used in any organization. Spreadsheets can do anything with numbers. Process mining can do anything with events. On the other hand, event data are not just any type of data and the notion of process is very broad. These slides aim to clarify this. You need to check: It is very naïve to replace existing software with something 'fresh'. The process mining process in a figure:
    Process mining W.vanAalst, the flow

    The PDCA cycle is a fit in this seen the PDSA in the figure.
    VSM VaSM, processes understanding the physiology
    A value stream can be represented in a very simplified way that it too oversimplified. Adding segmentation (demarcation, deny, deny for functional safety design) resulted in a more overwhelming visual. Organisation Boarding safetycvaluestream  Neuro
    In a figure,
    see right side
    Culture: backend vs frontend
    Culture: Technology vs Functionality
    Split control for what is possible faced in threats.
    Knowledge in multiple areas each for specific domain.
    Self managed for knowledge content for each area. The controls, regulators for corrections adjustments is another dimension for this.

    Although there are four visible areas in the way of it is represented there are also 2 lines of six stages for the push (top-half technology) and six for the pull (bottom-half marketing/service).
    Build modern01

    A-2.3 Frictions in managing risks, uncertainties

    Analysing systems, designing systems, architecting the (Where) is acknowledging a level of non-predictability in results. Natural conflict: leaders demand for certainties, predictability. A system component to fulfil by roles and tasks is Risk Management.
    🚧 What to look at in understanding risks: This is about Brittle, Anxious, Nonlinear, and Incomprehensible
    🎭 A-2.3.1 Frictions by wanting certainties but reality are uncertainties
    Uncertainties: Epistemic or Reducible - Aleatory or Irreducible
    ❓ How to manage something where the knowledge of what when by who to do is unknown? Agile is Not Risk Management (Alone) (Herding Cats, Actionable information for decision-makers .. )
    .... Managing in the presence of uncertainty and the resulting risk means making estimates of the outcomes that will appear in the future from the decisions made today, in the presence of naturally occurring variances, and in probabilistic events during the period over which the decision is applicable. Without these estimates, there is no means of assessing a decision for its effectiveness in keeping the project on track for success.
    ➡ There is a connection between uncertainty and risk. This distinction is important for modeling the future performance of a project´s cost, schedule, and technical outcomes in the presence of reducible and irreducible risks.

    Uncertainties that can be reduced with more knowledge are called – Epistemic or Reducible. Epistemic (subjective or probabilistic) uncertainties are event-based, knowledge-based probabilities and are reducible by further knowledge gathering.
    👉🏾 Epistemic uncertainty pertains to the degree of knowledge about models and their parameters. This term comes from the Greek episteme (knowledge). Epistemic uncertainties,
    Uncertainties that cannot be reduced with knowledge are called - Aleatory or Irreducible.
    Aleatory uncertainties pertain to stochastic (non-deterministic) events, the outcome of which is described using a probability distribution function(PDF).
    The term aleatory comes from the Latin alea. For example in a game of chance stochastic variability's are the natural randomness of the process and are characterized by a probability density function (PDF) for their range and frequency.
    👉🏾 Since these variability's are natural they are therefore irreducible.

    Risk management Agile Process development, critics
    ❓ How to manage uncertainties, unknowns when going for running a project?
    Agile is Not Risk Management (Alone) (Herding Cats, ...) In a figure:
    Glen risklist
    When it is suggested that projects can be managed without estimating the impact of any decisions, probabilistic events, or underlying statistical processes - ... think ... - and proceed at your own risk. The term Risk Management for projects means something beyond agile concepts.
    Let´s look at each of these suggestions that Agile is Risk Management. First, look at the risk management processes and what they entail in practice. PP&C, Program Planning and Control, is facing a lot of challenges. The mentioned gaps are not that complex but should get managed. PP&C is a tiny subset of Command & Control C&C.
    A-2.3.2 Gaps for understanding information process uncertainties
    A Focus on Information Technology Project Management
    A closed loop in software-intensive system Is There an Underlying Theory of Software Project Management (2023 Glen B. Alleman and AnnMarie Oien, PhD). Software Intensive Systems (SIS) projects traditionally use formal management processes for the system's acquisition or development, deployment, and operation that emphasize in-depth planning. This approach organizes work into phases separated by decision points. Supporters of this approach emphasize that changes made early in the project can be less expensive than changes made late in the project.
    SIS can be found in a variety of business and technical domains:
    GLNAL open - closed loops
    The adaption process & good regulator
    "To adapt" means to change a behavior to conform to new circumstances. Intuitively, an adaptive controller is a control system that can modify its behavior in response to changes in the dynamics of the process and the character of the disturbances. ... Even agile processes are driven by linear, non-statistical algorithms and need the statistical aspects of the underlying processes.
    To be adaptive, the control loop needs to:
    This is nice, these are abstracted versions of my ALC types:
    Another closed loop, doubling the loops
    Before establishing this context, agile methods include four significant attributes. They are: GLNAL PMBok gap loop For gaps in traditional project management (PM), look at PMBOK's control block picture: A question for more advanced closed loops, good regulators.
    A complete approach and abstracted versions of my ALC-V3 type:
    Risk attention point for safety in Cybers/administrative world
    Article 21: Cybersecurity risk-management measures, ❓ How to manage something complex like cyber security? At least there are high level guidelines. Nis2
    1. Member States shall ensure that essential and important entities take appropriate and proportionate technical, operational and organisational measures to manage the risks posed to the security of network and information systems which those entities use for their operations or for the provision of their services, and to prevent or minimise the impact of incidents on recipients of their services and on other services.
      Taking into account the state-of-the-art and, where applicable, relevant European and international standards, as well as the cost of implementation, the measures referred to in the first subparagraph shall ensure a level of security of network and information systems appropriate to the risks posed. When assessing the proportionality of those measures, due account shall be taken of the degree of the entity’s exposure to risks, the entity’s size and the likelihood of occurrence of incidents and their severity, including their societal and economic impact.
    2. The measures referred to in paragraph 1 shall be based on an all-hazards approach that aims to protect network and information systems and the physical environment of those systems from incidents, and shall include at least the following:
    The complexity is a verifiable understandable translation to instantations from identifications.
    A-2.3.3 The quest in understanding abstractions, documenting knowledge
    Reasons for doing documentation
    👁 The first bullet is the question why to document. Lean/Agile Documentation Strategies for Agile Teams (Agile Modeling Scott Ambler) This article explores agile and lean philosophies towards documentation within IT organizations. ... From AM’s point of view a document is any artifact external to source code whose purpose is to convey information in a persistent manner. This is different from the concept of a model, which is an abstraction that describes one or more aspects of a problem or a potential solution addressing a problem. Some models will become documents, or be included as a part of them, although many more will simply be discarded once they have fulfilled their purpose. ...
    Agile developers recognize that documentation is an intrinsic part of any system, the creation and maintenance of which is a “necessary evil” to some and an enjoyable task for others, an aspect of software development that can be made agile when you choose to do so. There are several valid reasons to create documentation:
    1. Your stakeholders require it. Documentation is fundamentally a business decision.
    2. To define a contract model. define how your system and an external one interacts.
    3. To support communication with an external group.
    4. To support organizational memory.
    5. For audit purposes.
    6. To think something through.
    👁 The second bullet point is the question what to document, trade off and balance by values.
    👁 The third bullet point is the question how to document. Remarkable is the assumption to use a disperse set of tools for documentation but not a holistic simple to use for the minimal effort (cost) at the moment that is relevant.
    The Jabes proposal in a nutshell
    There are four layers: Avoiding the effort in everybody has to build a own template a own reference set themself and creating the tools for that is the proposed innovation. Asking a LLM whether this already is existing, results in a list of building blocks to create that yourself.
    Indicators as strategy tactical operations are avoided at the architecting design approach because of the fractal nature of systems.
    Seen Gaps for ideas, improvement proposals
    Leadership challenges:
    A list of common gaps by culture an assumptions for uncertainties
    🕳👁❗ to note and improve:
    1. Managing capabality: acceptance of uncertainties where certaintity is a desire.
    2. Managing capabality: acceptance of unknown knowledge where knowledge is wanted.
    3. Managing capabality: Capable to understand and manage generic risks.
    4. Ethical mind to avoid the evils as much as possible, at least open in it.
    5. Open to architectural decisions at different layers: strategic, tactical, operational.
    6. Well documented knowledge of processes and the information value streams.
    7. Managing capabality: to manage the cyber security risks appropiate.
    Solution proposal 💡❗✅ a useful method and practice
    Facilitators in the information processing disciplines challenges:
    A list of common gaps in process science, viable systems.
    🕳👁❗ to note and improve:
    1. Openess for adapt how to change the change process.
    2. Openess to adapt and use the knowledge of engineer specialists.
    3. support for reduction complex questions into smaller simplistic ones.
    4. Acknowledge predictability demand: product Q&Q, delivery moment, cost.
    5. Capable of recognizing organisational issues.
    6. Capable of escalating organisational issues that result in change.
    7. Capable of prioritising understanding the VaSM (values streams) of processes and changes.
    8. Openess to adapt how to manage variations in the VaSM processes
    9. Openess to adapt how to use VaSM and process mining for change processes.
    10. Awareness of the sheer number of different closed loops.
    11. A goal to use all of the possible controllable closed loops wisely.
    Solution proposal 💡❗✅ a useful method and practice.
    Doers in the information processing disciplines challenges:
    A list of common gaps in the information processing disciplines.
    🕳👁❗ to note and improve:
    1. Mindset acknowledging the duality data-driven process driven.
    2. Mindset acknowledging the difference in assumption on processes and reality.
    3. Awareness of the importance of closed loops, PDCA.
    4. Goal: implementing understandable controllable closed loops.
    Solution proposal 💡❗✅ a useful method and practice

    A-2.3.4 The quest for safe information processes not harming the value
    Tangible security, safety: design, based on experts proficiency
    Physical security is very old even executed pre first-wave because being a matter of survival. Center of Gravity (CcG), a term (Clausewitz) to identify the source of strength. By protecting the own and attacking the enemy's, strategists can achieve decisive results with minimal effort.
    IT landschap Demarcation the sixth D. Physical security is often broken down into a set of general concepts, the big “Ds” of security – Deter, Detect, Deny, Delay, and Defend. This division of function is useful for reducing a complex security problem into a set of simpler ones that can be systematically addressed.
    A clear demarcation of the perimeter is so vital to the overall security and efficient operation of a site that demarcate can be considered the sixth “D” of security.
    The order wit an indication of the transudations:
    1. Demarcation, By establishing clear boundaries, you know exactly where to enforce access controls. (Segmentation)
    2. Deny, When a denial fails, slowing down an attacker gives your team more time to react.
    3. Delay - As adversaries hit friction, overt deterrents reinforce that the environment is hostile.
    4. Deter, When deterrence fails, an environment primed for visibility spot intruders faster.
    5. Detect, With timely detection, your incident response playbooks activates, before escalatation.
    6. Defend Be ready to act for timely actions on threats.
    The order: Where How What - Which When Who adapt to external system events.
    The internal system adaption: What How Where - Who When Which. This is an essential difference compared to e.g. engineering.
    Intangible security, safety: design, based on experts proficiency
    35.030 CIS contols v8.1 The CIS Critical Security Controls® (CIS Controls)® started as a simple grassroots activity to identify the most common and important real-world cyber attacks that affect enterprises every day, translate that knowledge and experience into positive, constructive action for defenders, and then share that information with a wider audience. The original goals were modest—to help people and enterprises focus their attention and get started on the most important steps to defend themselves from the attacks that really mattered. The CIS Controls have matured into an international community of volunteer individuals and institutions that:
    cissecurity IG groups The CIS Controls reflect the combined knowledge of experts from every part of the ecosystem (companies, governments, individuals), with every role (threat responders and analysts, technologists, information technology (IT) operators and defenders, vulnerability-finders, tool makers, solution providers, users, policy-makers, auditors, etc.), and across many sectors (government, power, defense, finance, transportation, academia, consulting, security, IT, etc.), who have banded together to create, adopt, and support the CIS Controls.

    AI Security best practices, based on experts proficiency
    In every hype also with AI the design of security is missing, only the old "best practices" are renewed in other words. AI risk control (Alan Jason 2025) Most organizations are deploying AI—but few are securing it. Microsoft’s AI Security Risk Assessment is a wake-up call for CISOs, architects, and risk leads. It’s not just theory—it’s a hands-on framework that maps AI risks across the full lifecycle: from data sourcing to model deployment. This framework doesn’t reinvent the wheel—it snaps into ISO 27001, NIST 800-53, and your existing SDL. : AI Security Risk Assessment /a> Best practices and guidance to secure AI systems
    dual feeling

    A-2.4 Systems: identification to instantiation (lean)

    There is a distraction from the
    real business goal that information processing should solve. A desire for easy solutions without management impact. The
    reality is a needed culture change in management.
    What to look at for the why:
    A-2.4.1 Dualities in the system & model assumptions vs reality
    Data driven - process driven
    There is strong relationship between two approaches, data-driven, process-driven they can´t exist without the other. fluxicon disco manual (vdaalst)
    Data science is the profession of the future. However, it is not sufficient to focus on data storage and data analysis. The data scientist also needs to relate data to processes. At the same time, process analysis professionals need to learn how to incorporate data from the IT systems into their work.
    Process mining W.vanAalst
    In a figure:
    See left side
    Assumed processes - reality
    When you ask someone about how their process is being performed, or look how it is documented, the structure is typically relatively simple (“First we do X, then, we do Y, etc.”). However, in
    reality processes are much more complex.
    👉🏾 There is rework: Steps have to be done again, because they were not right the first time.
    👉🏾 Exceptions need to made to deal with special situations, different people perform the same process in different ways, and so on.
    👉🏾 So, there is a discrepancy between how people assume that processes are performed and how they are actually executed.
    ... But looking further, this discrepancy is not even the biggest problem. After all, to a certain extent it can be expected that not everything is always going according to plan.
    💣 The much bigger problem is that in most situations nobody has an overview about how the
    real process looks like in the first place.
    Process mining W.vanAalst
    In a figure:
    See left side
    Why is it so difficult to have an overview about how the processes are actually performed?
    A-2.4.2 Value in information flow: Feed back, closed loops, Control
    VSM, process mining, processes
    From: "Want to do a process mining project" slides and videos (W vd Aalst). The idea of using data, transformed into information for seeing what is going on the shop floor.
    Process mining W.vanAalst
    In a figure:
    See right side

    VSM, processes, architectural decisions
    Decisions in processes are classifies as architectural. The problem is there are applicable layers for this in the change process or in the specficiations.
    ISO/IEC 42010 defines requirements on the description of system, software and enterprise architectures. It aims to standardise the practice of architecture description by defining standard terms, presenting a conceptual foundation for expressing, communicating and reviewing architectures and specifying requirements that apply to architecture descriptions, architecture frameworks and architecture description languages.
    Architecting model
    In a figure:
    See right side


    Agile value stream changes - execute
    Assume all the specifications are physical stored artifacts in a standard meta model. When going for change the goal is an adjustment of specifications by the change. That adjustment is describing new version of the product in the portfolio.

    For every activity there is a planning and logging control dataset. The meta model conforms to the layering in the nine-plane with some differences:
    ❶ The suggestion box, backlog, known issues, innovation proposals (down left)
    ❷ design & building the process or components (top left)
    ❸ validations of the process the process, is at the II (top right)
    ❹ the specifications with, known issues, is at the IV (down right)
    Once a change has been started there is continuous activity for "design/build" and "product validation". This stops at the moment the enablement is blocked or the new specifications are accepted to be of high quality where no need for change is requested.
    Jabes product
    A figure:
    See left side

    Agile value streams change - closed loop
    Going for a closed loop control the first actions is a structured registration of activities and results. For every activity there is a planning and logging control dataset. All of these control datasets are sources for reporting and analytics. A standardised centralised approach enables standard reporting solutions. More important it is an opening to advanced analytics giving more insight more knowledge more wisdom on changes.
    The four control datasets:
    Jabes product
    A figure:
    See left side

    The transformation unit - technology
    There are three levels to orchestrate for the transformation:
    There are three area´s of interest to orchestrate for the transformation:
    The goal with the transformation: transform the retrieved source materials of information into a new product of information. Use the conforming assembly instructions and validate the expectations of levels of quality are met.
    Jabes process Assurance
    A figure:
    See right side

    🎭 A-2.4.3 Adjustments for the Zachman 6*6 systems thinking framework
    Abandoning the linear analytical approach to one possible option
    The Zachman 6*6 reference frame has two axis: The assumption and usual interpretation is that these are for a linear controlled top-down managed process. That was never the intention neither a a fit how systems are working. Worse the ordered engineering flow is denied because a rule was made columns are not ordered. There was no correction on those rules although that engineering order was made log after that.
    👁 💡 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. At this point the complexity grows beyond the scope of this page.
    A split-off for details see 🔰 here (6x6 systems lean).

    Back to the basics of strategy
    IT architects, digital leaders and tech professionals who are curious about the intersection of technology, people and organization. Do you recognize this? You build technically sound solutions, but: To discuss: With real-world examples such as: From Patterns of Strategy by Patrick Hoverstadt (SCIO NLKNVI webinar 2025) the question what strategy is about:
    This completely crushes down the idea that strategy is something that is decided in the boardroom. The idea that change is something that can bed decided on in assumed certainties by assumptions. How systems fundamentally behave is really driving change. systems_methodologies_from_first_systems_principles (Patrick Hoverstadt, Lucy Loh 2023 ) This paper argues that when this is not the case,when confronted with a situation where there is not aready-made approach waiting to be deployed, the surestand fastest route to developing an approach that is sys-temically sound is by going back to the roots of systemsthinking and that these are codified in a set of principles. ...
    Selecting the easiest-to-understandcomponents from various approaches and assuming thatputting them together will be a systemically soundapproach ignores not only the epistemological differencesbetween approaches but also the questions of coherenceand systemic purpose that are critical in developing amethodology if it is to be genuinely useful.
    blog referencing Hoverstadt
    A-2.4.4 Integrating systems thinking to lean and more
    An origin in thinking on system constraints
    The bullwhip effect is a supply chain phenomenon where orders to suppliers tend to have a larger variability than sales to buyers, which results in an amplified demand variability upstream. In part, this results in increasing swings in inventory in response to shifts in consumer demand as one moves further up the supply chain. The concept first appeared in Jay Forrester's Industrial Dynamics (1961) and thus it is also known as the Forrester effect. It has been described as "the observed propensity for material orders to be more variable than demand signals and for this variability to increase the further upstream a company is in a supply chain".
    why-leveling Hence, breaking this vicious cycle of fluctuations can yield great benefits throughout the value chain. Usually, these benefits materialize upstream where your parts come from. However, these can also be within your own system, where your workers can probably work more efficient if production is leveled.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fifth_Discipline
    Flow in interactions
    Thinking about thinking
    Opening the Box by Jan de Visch (SCIO NL KNVI presentation dutch language) J de Visch site
    https://design-thinking.in/crossing-the-chasm
    https://design-thinking.in/product-release
    Flow in interactions
    The relationship between systems thinking and lean
    Systems Thinking and Lean? ((Michael Ballé 2009) A fascinating question, one not so easily answered, because we’re talking about two very different approaches, one a philosophy as well as a set of tools, the other, a practice. In its broadest sense, systems thinking is a framework that takes into account the interconnected nature of systems. It is also a thinking tool, which helps us look at the impact of feedback loops on how a system behaves; analyze specific situations to explain otherwise puzzling behaviors; and design interventions with an eye for potential unintended consequences.
    ... In the process of developing this capability,Toyota has found that the information the production process receives is at least as important as its delivery capability. This is pure systems thinking. The ompany started by focusing on the impact of feedback loops on “lead time.”. Lead time is the interval from the moment the customer gives an order to the point when the company collects the cash; it encompasses production and stocking time. Toyota developed a unique method called the “Material and Information Flow Analysis” to visualize where information flows impacted the process and how. (This technique became known outside ofToyota as “Value Stream Mapping,” from John Shook and Mike Rother’s bestselling book, Learning to See).
    The damage caused by the lack of systems thinking in attempts to apply lean shows starkly in two typical cases. Many companies have latched onto Value Stream Mapping as a great tool to analyze their processes (which it is). But when you look at their maps more closely, you often find that the production process is sketched in painful detail, whereas the information flow is barely suggested.
    Kanban is about taking all ambiguity out of the information flow to make sure that the final assembly schedule is reproduced “mechanically” throughout the supply chain,avoiding the need for the individual judgments that contribute to the bullwhip effect.
    The bottom line: Without an understanding of systems thinking it's hard to get lean right and without the practice of lean techniques it's difficult to make system thinking a day-today reality to concretely improve systems performance.
    Michael Ballé site the start Four fields to better understand business
    The relationship between systems thinking and lean
    https://www.amazon.com/Managing-Systems-Thinking-Dynamics-Business/dp/0077079515 The common scenario when a problem arises in an organization is that management find a solution that is localized and focused on solving that specific problem. However, the problem may re-occur if the management decisions that allowed the difficulty to arise in the first place are not retraced and examined. Systems thinking is a framework that enables managers to exploit the commonsense, intuitive responses they may already follow when getting to the root of problems or inefficiencies in their organizations. By unravelling decision-making processes in a logical, systematic way, managers can address issues central to their organization, creating far-reaching benefits. This text is a practical guide to this method, popularized by Peter Senge's "The Fifth Discipline". It has a readable style, diagrams and anecdotal case studies that provide and explanation of the benefit and "how to" of systems thinking is a business environment. The text identifies areas of action and a seven-step approaaoch to systematic analysis.
     legal

    A-2.5 Instantiations conforming identifications

    Optimising lean "processes: cyber/adminstrative" is the goal Jabes is helping to focus on. Value stream processes are core business lines. These are dependent on the quality & quantity of a technology connection.
    Where to pay attention on:
    📚 A-2.5.1 Fractals, Log frames, Self preservation, Autopoiesis
    Thinking references - quadrant (2*2), 9-plane (3*3) or 6*6 matrix models
    Ordening categorizing the thinking mindset is putting them is some framework. The most used one is a quadrant. The advantage is usage for the most simple questions for what to choose. For example: The disadvantage is is that is very limited by that limited options. For example the shown quadrant for systems thinking: 2*2 3*3 6*6 fractals
    The question of what complexity is hidden too much, is avoiding oversimplification.
    In the 6*6 matrix model there is some agreement but still a lot of confusion. The accepted understanding for the vertical axis is that it is an ordered abstraction. These are: The confusion immediate starts in wanting to see this ordered vertical axis as a linear flow but the intention is about interactions and transformations in both directions by the neighbours of the cells. The horizontal axis never got an agreement although a proposed ordering did start.
    That ordering is set by an engineering context, a technological perspective, there is also a trade perspective. The context for the understanding, knowledge resources and skills that are needed are slightly different.
    1. The perspective of being a service by a system in an environment.
    2. The perspective of operating an engineering a service within a system
    The trade perspective offering a product/service needing resources: The engineering perspective from identification to instantiation: In this way also the horizontal axis is ordered. the same challenge in confusion by wanting to see this as a linear flow but the intention is about interactions and transformations in both directions. By this we have a geographical map for activities with only horizontale and vertical interactions. There is however a third dimension of time, for every cell the own history is also interacting from the past in the now to the future. Although the simple usual presentations are 2D there are really projections of at least three dimensions (3D)! There are more dimensions than these three, these are:
    1. values of any kind, not only financials
    2. the way and options for adaptions, innovation to any kind of changes
    3. Knowledge reference frames to use for content in build maintain and share
    The usual oversimplification by models is hiding too much of all these dimensions.
    Analysing a system
    You need to: Let’s face it, the universe is messy. It is nonlinear, turbulent, and dynamic. It spends its time in transient behaviour on its way to somewhere else, not in mathematically neat equilibria. It self-organises and evolves. It creates diversity and uniformity. That’s what makes the world interesting, that’s what makes it beautiful, and that’s what makes it work. Remember, always, that everything you know, and everything everyone knows, is only a model. We are too fascinated by the events they generate. In the end, it seems that mastery has less to do with pushing leverage points than it does with strategically, profoundly, madly, letting go and dancing with the system. And remember that power over the rules is real power.
    🎭 A-2.5.2 Working Cell Goal: Aligned Operations
    A typology of system agents like inventors and diplomats
    These aren't occupations—they’re roles of influence. A single person can play multiple agents across time or simultaneously. Some are system-preserving (Operator, Diplomat, Custodian );
    others are system-transforming (Inventor, Trickster, Prophet).
    others are system-describing prescribing (Cartographer, Healer, Philosopher )
    Traits of Meta-Agents are fluidly traverse systems, often creating friction or synthesis between domains. Theyre often understood only in hindsight—misfits in their time, blueprints for the future. They forge languages where none existed: new metaphors, frameworks, vocabularies.
    The VSM outlines five interrelated subsystems necessary for any system (organization, society, organism) to remain viable—able to survive in a changing environment.
    Role Function Metaphor
    system-1 Operational units Muscles doing the work
    system-2 Coordination Nervous system—managing tension
    system-3 Control & optimization Liver—resource distribution
    system-4 Intelligence/Adaptation Brain—future planning
    system-5 Policy/Identity Prefrontal cortex—purpose & values

    A typology of system agents like inventors and diplomats
    System 2 – Diplomats stabilize relationships, optimize communication between subsystems (e.g., departments, nations, stakeholders). They maintain systemic cohesion in real time.
    Meta-Agents:
    Role Why They Belong Here
    Conductor Orchestrates timing and synchronization across units Runs cross-unit rhythm sessions to align calendars, SLAs
    Translator Ensures common language and semantics Maintains a shared glossary; resolves terminology gaps
    Buffer Manager Regulates safety stocks, capacity and slack Monitors real-time work-in-progress and adjusts buffers
    Gatekeeper Controls flows at critical interfaces Screens, routes, and protocols incoming/outgoing requests
    Harmonizer Minimizes friction and conflict in handoffs Facilitates joint process-tuning workshops
    A typology of system agents like inventors and diplomats
    System 3 (Meta-Agent) – Diplomats stabilize relationships, optimize communication between subsystems (e.g., departments, nations, stakeholders). They maintain systemic cohesion in real time, Keeps the present functional and relationships stable.
    Meta-Agents:
    Role Why They Belong Here
    Steward Allocates resources and enforces accountability Rebalances budgets, personnel, assets among operational units
    Risk Officer Anticipates systemic risks and designs mitigations Runs stress tests, maintains a living risk-heat map
    Portfolio Manager Curates and governs the internal project/service portfolio Reviews, prioritizes and green-lights unit proposals
    Integrator
    Performance Analyst
    Synthesizes operational reports for executive oversight
    Tracks KPIs, trends and system health
    Crafts System 3* review briefs and recommends synergies
    Publishes weekly dashboards and triggers corrective interventions
    Auditor Verifies compliance, quality and procedure adherence Conducts rotational audits and publishes deviation reports
    How They Interrelate System 4 – Inventors scan the environment, introduce new patterns, imagine futures. They anticipate discontinuities and trigger adaptive learning or redesign. Thea Sends probes into the future, introducing new potential
    Meta-Agents System 4:
    Role Why They Belong Here
    Explorer (Horizon-Scanner) Systematically surveys technological, market, cultural and ecological landscapes for weak signals. Conducting trend analyses and scanning adjacent domains.
    Boundary Spanner Translates across disciplinary, organizational or cultural divides. Facilitating cross-domain workshops and residencies.
    Pattern Reader (Complexity Theorist) Detects recurrent motifs—bifurcations, cascades, emergent orders—within evolving systems. Applying network analysis, agent-based modeling, pattern language.
    Cartographer (Mapmaker) Visualizes dynamic system architectures, flows, and feedback loops to make complexity legible. Designing interactive system-maps or causal loop diagrams.
    -- Futurist (Prophet) -- Articulates compelling visions that emotionally mobilize stakeholders toward new horizons. Publishing manifestos, keynote provocations, thought pieces.
    Ethnographer Observes emerging practices, rituals, and user behaviors to ground System 4 insights in lived reality. Field immersions, contextual interviews, and diaries.
    Opportunity Curator (Portfolio Manager) Curates a balanced set of prototypes, pilot projects, and investments to hedge bets. Allocating resources across incremental, adjacent and radical bets.
    Network Weaver Builds coalitions and innovation ecosystems—linking startups, labs, universities, and communities. Orchestrating hackathons, consortiums, living labs.
    Scenario Planner Crafts multiple “what‐if” futures to stress-test current strategies and surface inflection points. Building detailed narrative maps of plausible futures.
    Role Why They Belong Here
    Explorer & Scenario Planner Combine real-world scouting with imaginative forecasting to ensure visions are both grounded and expansive.
    Boundary Spanner & Network Weaver Translate insights into collaborations, ensuring that breakthroughs don’t remain siloed.
    Pattern Reader & Opportunity Curator Identify systemic leverage points and allocate experimentation resources where returns (or learnings) will be maximized.
    Ethnographer & Cartographer Anchor speculative futures in rich, qualitative data and make them visible through maps and models.
    A viable system needs tension between System 3 and System 4:
    Too much diplomacy (System 3) = stagnation, over-regulation.
    Too much invention (System 4) = chaos, detachment from operational reality.
    This dance creates dynamic viability. The inventor projects horizons, the diplomat grounds transformation within the system’s coherence. One seeds novelty; the other ensures it doesn’t burn the house down. System 5 (Meta-Agent) – Harmonizes values between past, present, and future. Ensures transformations serve the system’s deeper identity. They Harmonizes values between past, present, and future. Ensures transformations serve the system’s deeper identity.
    Meta-Agents System 5:
    Role Why They Belong Here
    () Philosopher Questions the system’s premises, ethics, and direction. Defines the “why” behind the what.
    Visionary Leader Channels invention into coherent narratives. Keeps the soul of the system intact amid change.
    Meta-Strategist Reconciles the logic of diplomacy and invention—preserves values while evolving systems.
    Cultural Architect Encodes meaning in rituals, symbols, language—making change feel like continuity.

    The end of the hierarchical organisation in the scope of decision making
    In the information age, centralized decision-making becomes a bottleneck.
    Alberts/Hayes argue that information-rich environments demand empowered actors at the edge who can interpret, decide, and act without waiting for top-down directives. Dismantling traditional hierarchies challenges entrenched power structures, cultural norms, and comfort zones.
    But the payoff, greater innovation, ownership, and responsiveness—is transformative. Its a human-centered philosophy for leadership, collaboration, and organizational design in the 21st century.
    There are strategic goals by “Power to the Edge” (Alberts/Hayes) The tacticals for adapting the strategy: Nature as a Model: References to ecosystems (e.g., fish schools, bird flocks, forests) reinforce the idea that decentralized systems can be highly adaptive and resilient. Dismantling traditional hierarchies challenges entrenched power structures, cultural norms, and comfort zones. But the payoff—greater innovation, ownership, and responsiveness—is transformative.
    Bringing it to life: Map Your Value Streams, Build a Facilitation Cadre, Layers in Feedback Mechanisms.
    A glimpse beyond: Nature-Inspired Networks, Dynamic Governance (Explore lightweight “policy as code”), Human-Tech Co-evolution (Experiment with AI assistants that surface context and risk at the edge). By weaving these tactics into your own context, you transform abstract strategy into everyday muscle memory—ultimately unlocking that human-centered, responsive organization the information age demands.
    The challlenge in the operations is adaption to the tactics. Sometimes it is a natural adatpive change by the way the operational work is done. The operational work however is a result of education, learning, training. The crux of the challenge lies in translating strategic tactics into everyday operational behaviors, especially when those behaviors spring from formal training, ingrained habits, and learned processes. To make adaptation more than a “one-off” shift, organizations must weave continuous learning and real-time feedback directly into the flow of work.
    1. Embed Learning in the Flow of Work
      • Microlearning Moments
        • Deliver bite-sized tutorials, videos, or checklists at the point of need (e.g., via mobile apps or digital dashboards).
        • Tie each micro-lesson to a tactical shift (e.g., “How to run a rapid A3 experiment” or “Facilitation prompts for daily huddles”).
      • On-the-Job Apprenticeship
        • Pair less experienced operators with rotating “tactical champions” who co-solve real problems.
        • Encourage shadowing and peer-led debriefs immediately after an adaptation is tried.
      • Digital Twins & Simulations
        • Use lightweight, scenario-based simulators to let teams practice new tactics in a risk-free virtual environment.
        • Enable rapid “what-if?” iterations so lessons learned inform the next real-world cycle.
    2. Create Continuous Feedback Loops
      • Real-Time Metrics & Visual Controls
        • Surface leading indicators (cycle time, decision latency, experiment throughput) on shop-floor or digital war-rooms.
        • Use simple “traffic-light” signals or Kanban boards to spotlight where the new tactics are stuck or succeeding.
      • Rapid PDCA Cadences
        • Shorten Plan-Do-Check-Act cycles from monthly to weekly (or even daily) so teams can adapt within days, not quarters.
        • Document small wins and failures in a shared repository for cross-team learning.
      • Voice of the Edge
        • Empower frontline teams to propose tactical tweaks and vote on the most promising ones.
        • Route their insights directly into leadership forums to keep strategy grounded in operational reality.
    3. Cultivate a Learning Culture
      • Communities of Practice
        • Form cross-functional cohorts around each new tactic (e.g., “Lean Experimenters Guild” or “Edge Decision Network”)
        • Host regular show-and-tell sessions where practitioners demonstrate how they applied the tactic and what they learned.
      • “Training as a Journey,” Not an Event
        • Replace one-off workshops with a structured curriculum that combines e-learning modules, coaching clinics, and peer reviews over months.
        • Award digital badges or rotating leadership roles to spotlight mastery of each tactic.
      • Leader as Learning Sponsor
        • Have executives and managers attend the same micro-learning and simulation sessions as their teams.
        • Encourage them to coach, unblock, and publicly celebrate the adoption of new behaviors.
    Select one operational area (e.g., procurement, customer support) and launch an integrated adaptation program: microlearning, feedback loops, community forums, and metrics.
    Track both behavioral adoption (how often teams use the new tactic) and outcome impact (cycle time, error rates, engagement scores). Use these insights to refine the playbook before wider rollout.
    Evolve your learning platform into a living “Tactics Library”—ever-growing with new practices, case studies, and coaching clinics. Keep the organization in a perpetual beta of its own best practices. (Institutionalize Continuous Adaptation)
    By fusing education, on-the-job practice, real-time feedback, and cultural supports, you turn tactical shifts from isolated reforms into self-reinforcing operational habits. The result is a truly adaptive engine, where new strategies are mastered—and improved upon—right at the edge.
    The end of the hierarchical organisation in the scope of decision making
    Jabes documentation a rich structure that supports this edge empowerment: This forms a 3×3 matrix—a perfect scaffold for a DevOps maturity model. The Jabes model doesn’t just support DevOps—it extends it by embedding it in a broader organizational philosophy of sense-making, stewardship, and systemic alignment. his shift faces resistance. Why? But DevOps and Agile offer a pathway to maturity—not just technical, but organizational and human. Your Jabes framework provides the scaffolding to guide that journey.
    A-2.5.3 Document Information retrieval & delivery
    A-2.5.4 Document Information retrieval & delivery
    Confused-2

    A-2.6 Maturity 4: Change Processes in control

    "Managing technology service" is a prerequisite for "processes: cyber/adminstrative". Although the focus should be on the value stream processes it starts by the technology connection.
    From the three TIP, Bianl interrelated scopes:
    A-2.6.1 Understanding the pillars How and When for the Why
    ALC-V3 process line, closed loops - circular change
    When the need for change in information processing is high a devops perspective using several closed loops gives other attention points:


    The data driven process in a figure:

    👓 Click figure for context.
    Cubicles office
    Cubicles - Gemba
    Process Management, getting to the shopfloor. Enterprise engineering (J.Dietz) is one of the oldest going into service management with processes. It went into business process management.
    💣 To solve: there is no physical shop-floor, how to get the information describing the processes?
    Reference: "Want to do a process mining project" slides and videos (WvdAalst).
    Historical development: Process mining, four types of basic proces models:
    Cubicles office
    Cubicles - Processes
    ❓ How to manage processes for values streams when there is hardly anything for them documented?

    Technology: Getting rid of a waterfall dogma
    The statement: "all actions have to be finished before proceeding to the next stage", is not ❌ valid. A personal experience, a very long time ago, the project manager did claim this.
    The root cause was: incentives, culture, structure, resources. Indeed: all of those.

    vmap sdlc Reducing Lead Time 4 - Development" Development also has options to reduce the lead time that production does not have, namely concurrent engineering (also known as simultaneous engineering).
    👉🏾 In manufacturing, the part can be only in one process at a time. In development, multiple people can work on the same project.
    Similar at: Concurrent_engineering (wikipedia) .

    Technology: V-Model, non linearity.
    vmap sdlc (wikipedia)" The V-model is a graphical representation of a systems development lifecycle. It is used to produce rigorous development lifecycle models and project management models. The V-model falls into three broad categories, the German V-Modell, a general testing model, and the US government standard.
    In the visualisation the sequential order of the SIAR-model is included. There are many loopbacks to enable to react and apply change as soon as possible.
    Is There an Underlying Theory of Software Project Management (2023 Glen B. Alleman and AnnMarie Oien, PhD) Abstract: Traditional project management methods are based on scientific principles considered “normal science” but lack a theoretical basis for this approach. ...
    This paper suggests that when managing in the presence of uncertainties that create a risk to project success, adaptive control theory may be better suited as a model for project management in a rapidly changing, dynamically evolving network of statistical processes than traditional linear approaches.

    dual feeling thousand cuts
    Organisation goal: avoiding hidden costs.
    Ethical strategy, not that obivous. Lean: How to Look Good (An unusual post series)
    Managing is not easy. Making the right decisions and improving your company is difficult, especially if the available information is uncertain and incomplete. Sometimes, managers find it easier to simply pretend to do good and fudge the numbers instead of improving the bottom line. ...
    This post looks at another shady trick, where you save money now at the expense of the future of your company.
    👉🏾 For continuing success, you need to invest into the future of the company. Failure to do so will save you money now, but will damage or even destroy the company later. Unfortunately, some managers are more interested in their career than in their company. To be fair, some companies are also more interested in their company than in their people, hence often this is also a case of mutual disrespect. ...

    👉🏾 A list of evils collected out of the series:
    A-2.6.2 Deep dives BiAnl
    Intra References
    BiAnl, OR, is applicable to almost anything in an environment.
    The following is about what was doen before in understanding BiAnl:
    Reference Topic <|> Topic Reference
    👓 info types different types of information (data) 👓
    👓 Value Stream Value Stream, working cell shop floor 👓
    👓 transform information The Transformation job in details 👓
    👓 bi tech deep dive technology usage 👓

    More links associated - entry/exit
    Intra References by topics
    Shaping a cylce is touching almost anything in an environment.
    The following relationships are here in the mindmap approach:
    Details at:
    👓 Details multiple layers (SDLC sub-page)
    👓 The full ICT Business Pyramid. (SDLC sub-page)
    👓 threats for data & tools Proces Life Cycle. (BPM sub-page)
    👓 Machine supported develop Change ML AI. (BPM sub-page)
    👓 threats for data & tools Proces Life Cycle. (BPM sub-page)
    👓 resulting Life Cycle ALM, business Life Cycle. (BPM sub-page)
    More need to know:
    👓 Data Standards, patterns Information Flow. (to do)
    👓 Meta data Jabes framework.
    👓 DSS Decision support systems (Math sub-page)

    A-2.6.3 Maturity Tactical Shape Planes: People, Processes, Machines
    VSM learingtosee
    Maturity standard organisation
    "Managing technology service" is a prerequisite for "processes: cyber/adminstrative". Although the focus should be on the value stream processes it starts by the technology connection.
    From the three TIP, Bianl interrelated scopes:
    Maturity Attention Points
    Attention points for maturity level considerations & evaluations:
    Maturity id SubId Source Context
    CMM-4OO-4 Change staff
    capabilities
    AH1-1 A-2.1.1 Manage in uncertainties presenting for certainties Skills
    AH1-2 A-2.1.1 Manage to unknowns expecting them got known in time Skills
    AH1-3 A-2.1.1 Support reduce complex question into smaller ones Skills
    AH2-1 A-2.1.2 Understanding the Cyber Security gap, helping to close Skills
    AH2-2 A-2.1.2 Understanding: gap plant management, helping to close Skills
    AH3-1 A-2.1.3 Understanding the goal of closed loops Skills
    AH3-2 A-2.1.3 Helping, going for closed loops operational planes Skills
    AH3-3 A-2.1.3 Helping, going for closed loops analytical planes Skills
    AH3-4 A-2.1.3 Helping, going for closed loops change processes Skills
    AH4-1 A-2.2.1 Willing to adapt changes in the change process Skills
    AH5-1 A-2.2.2 Support better engineering options during changes Skills
    AH5-2 A-2.2.2 Be ethical as far as possible in constraint setting Skills
    AH6-1 A-2.2.3 Acknowledge predictability: VSM Quality & quantity Skills
    CMM-4OO-5 Change Processes
    Mangement
    BH1-1 A-2.3.1 Value stream (VSM) Understanding processes related Knowledge
    BH2-1 A-2.3.2 Understanding business value streams variations Knowledge
    BH2-2 A-2.3.2 Alignment business VSM questions to technology Communication
    BH2-3 A-2.3.2 Improvements business VSM aligned to technology Communication
    BH2-4 A-2.3.2 Understanding the role of decisions, architecture Knowledge
    BH2-5 A-2.3.2 Layers decision alignment: business VSM & technology Communication
    BH2-6 A-2.3.2 Alignment business VSM to technology for all decisions Communication
    BH3-1 A-2.3.3 Understanding duality: process-centric ⇄ data-driven Knowledge
    BH3-2 A-2.3.3 Alignment duality: process ⇄ data business, technology Communication
    BH3-3 A-2.3.3 Understanding deviance Ideal process, process
    reality
    Curiosity
    BH3-4 A-2.3.3 Improvements business VSM aligned for priories Communication
    BH4-1 A-2.4.1 Understanding closed loops in VSM processes Knowledge
    BH4-2 A-2.4.1 Improvements using closed loops in VSM processes Communication
    BH5-1 A-2.4.2 Understanding closed loops: functional, technical Knowledge
    BH5-2 A-2.4.2 Improvements using all kind of closed loops Communication
    BH6-1 A-2.4.3 Understanding theh shop floor by .. Curiosity
    BH6-2 A-2.4.3 Structuring what should be known of processes by .. Curiosity
    CMM-4OO-6 Tools Process
    Change
    JW1-1 A-2.5.1 Change culture change: standardised journal activities Structure
    JW1-2 A-2.5.1 Use standardised journals for reporting & analytics Structure
    JW2-1 A-2.5.2 Document information for the implementations T-Units Structure
    JW2-2 A-2.5.2 Document maintenance specifications T-Units Structure
    JW2-3 A-2.5.2 Document functionality operations T-Units Structure
    JW3-1 A-2.5.3 Document data contracts input & delivery Structure
    JW3-1 A-2.5.3 Document Functional transformations business rules Structure


    Global compliancy
    These references are at the index, they are a shared interest.

    Local "Shape" OR
    A limited OR (Operations research) & risk list:
    link , newstopic interest who, source date
    operations research (OR)
    (Sarah Lewis) Techtarget 2019
    BIDM - The Business Intelligence Development Model
    Catalina Sacu, Marco Spruit 2010-06
    Agile is Not Risk Management (Alone)
    Glen Alleman 2024-03
    Is There an Underlying Theory of Software Project Management
    Glen B. Alleman, AnnMarie Oien 2023
    "Data Mesh, Delivering Data-Driven Value at Scale" (book O´Reilly)
    Zhamak Deghani 2022
    What is risk management?
    IBM (corp) retrieved 2024
    What is risk management & why is it important?
    Kate Gibson (HBR) 2023-10
    Operational Research: Methods and Applications
    (*) 2024

    For "Operational Research: Methods and Applications", it is a collection of the whole area:
    The year 2024 marks the 75th anniversary of the Journal of the Operational Research Society. On this occasion, my colleague Fotios Petropoulos from University of Bath proposed to the editors of the journal to edit an encyclopedic article on the state of the art in OR.
    pioneering
    Sponsor, Owner: Jabes
    Building up the maturity level questions in the A-2.* series resulted in a logical fit for ownership sponsorship:
    That there should be a fit for a Sponsor, ownership for Jabes somewhere was evident. The idea emerged from a technical challenge "Serve" but belong to the "Shape" domain. Solving compliancy challenges for "Steer" the organisation made them a customer for the tool not the owner.

    A recap: several sever impediments to solve:
    📚 A-2.6.4 Retro perspective on risks &uncertainties by Strategy
    What about Risk management (I)?
    "MS Co pilot" (chatgpt: IBM HBR Techtarget Wikipedia ,,):
    Risk management is the systematic process of identifying, assessing, and mitigating threats or uncertainties that can affect an organization. It involves analyzing the likelihood and impact of risks, developing strategies to minimize harm, and monitoring the effectiveness of these measures123. Key steps in the risk management process: A successful risk management program helps protect an organization from uncertainty, reduces costs, and increases the likelihood of business continuity and success. By committing necessary resources to control and mitigate risk, businesses safeguard their reputation, minimize losses, encourage innovation, and support growth.

    What about Risk management (II)?
    DoD Risk, Issue, and Opportunity Management Guide (2017 Preface):
    Risk management is an endeavor that begins with requirements formulation and assessment, includes the planning and conducting of a technical risk reduction phase if needed, and strongly influences the structure of the development and test activities.
    DoD risk mangement Active risk management requires investment based on identification of where to best deploy scarce resources for the greatest impact on the program’s risk profile.
    PMs and staff should shape and control risk, not just observe progress and react to risks that are
    realized.
    Anticipating possible adverse events, evaluating probabilities of occurrence, understanding cost and schedule impacts, and deciding to take cost effective steps ahead of time to limit their impact if they occur is the essence of effective risk management.
    Risk management should occur throughout the lifecycle of the program and strategies should be adjusted as the risk profile changes.
    Strategy Human Link Why Strategy fails: The link we keep missing: Human Link (2025 J.Kraayenbrink)
    We talk a lot about strategy. Vision, ambition, planning, frameworks, execution… But something keeps breaking. You can have the best ideas and the clearest roadmap, and still fall short. Again and again.
    The reason? In the chain from ambition to impact, one link is consistently weak: Strategic Competency. This is not just about knowing the strategy. It’s about whether people have the human capabilities to: Strategy doesn’t fail in the boardroom. It fails in the gaps between insight and action.

      
    🎯 101-IS VM-VMs Ideate-EE Plan-EE DO-4OO CMM5-4OO 🎯
      
    🚧  TIP Risk O-ALC Gemba Stations DO PDCA CMM4-4OO 🚧
      
    🔰 Contents Frame-ref OR Forest Metrics DO LSS CMM3-4OO 🔰


    A-3 Encourage the enterprise by decisions in wisdom


    Confused-2

    A-3.1 Simple information & services

    Running an organisation is a special job without a clear define craftmanship. The variety volatility is too big in the very diverse number of circumstances. Decision makers are needing information, using other persons skills to help in underpinned decisions.
    General focus areas:
    A-3.1.1 Simple Aligned data management - Process management
    ⚖ Data Governance - organise
    Simple data management (Robert Borkes)
    The 9-Square Data Management Model offers a robust framework tailored to foster strategic alignment across diverse facets of business operations. Specifically crafted to address the challenges faced by executives grappling with data-related issues, this model provides targeted solutions and guidance. By serving as a guiding principle, it facilitates the synchronization of business and data strategies, leading to enhanced efficiency in organizational decision-making processes.
    With strategic goals centered around maximizing “return on data”, and clear objectives aimed at improving decision-making, optimizing organizational structure, and delivering exceptional services, this model empowers organizations to harness the full potential of their data assets.
    R.Borkes 9-plane
    in a figure:
    See left side

    JwvAalst duality
    😉 At this high level, the complementary artifact:
      👁 process
    is an alternative column topic for:
      👁 data.
    Data artifacts are materialised the processes are imaginair, only by observation of activities to see.

    Using other words, other order:
    ⚙ Data Governance - understanding
    Understanding the logic concept context on data, information requires a shared vocabulary.
    Organisation Information Data
    Serve Usable accessible services Operational information Data catalog
    Shape Optimised organisation Tactical information Data dictionary
    Steer Improved decision making Strategical information Glossary business


    ⚙ Service, product Governance - understanding
    Understanding the missions (what), how to product is made, logic business rules (what), requires a shared product knowledge with applicable capabilities.
    Organisation Information Process
    Serve Usable accessible services Operational transformations Specifications products
    Shape Optimised organisation Tactical alignments adjustments Verifications products
    Steer Improved visions on missions Strategical plans for change Product Portfolio

    🕳👁❗Hoshin Kanri, the playing field.

    A-3.1.2 Simple Organising Enterprise Services
    ⚖ Lean PDCA
    The PDCA (Plan-Do-Check-Act) has a long history but at some moment when going to another culture came back with changed concept, context. The check instead of sell tells having gone in a closed loop. 25 Years after W. Edwards Deming
    Allaboutlean deming pdca
    in a figure:
    See right side
    japan japan Context Deming
    Plan Yotei pre- act of decide or define. Make - refine - schedule/plan - execute design
    Do Suru versatile: "to do", "to perform", also "add" (pull-push)produce
    Check chekku examine in order to determine its accuracy, quality, or condition sell
    Act akushon the fact or process of doing something, typically to achieve an aim redesign


    ⚖ Feedback, closed loop
    The highest maturity level is aligning the vision mission with what is happening. The feedback, verification of results with intentions, goals, is the beating heart of
    real lean (PDCA).
    BIDM
    BI analytics is integrated or not in the business process can strongly affect the decision making process. Hence, we consider this category to be a very important one when delimiting a maturity stage.
    Business Intelligence Development Model
    in a figure:

    All levels strategy, tactical, operational have their closed loop.

    Although having the mindset set for BI (Business Intelligence) in the document, the concept is very generic.
    🕳👁❗Hoshin Kanri, closed loop.

    Build modern01

    A-3.2 Vision & mission for Visions & Missions

    Running an organisation is a special job without a clear define craftmanship. The variety volatility is too big in the very diverse number of circumstances. Decision makers are needing information, using other persons skills to help in underpinned decisions.
    General focus areas:
    A-3.2.1 Strategy Visions
    ⚖ mission values
    Hoshin Kanri:
    Part 1: The To-Do List x-matrix 4 seasons
    ... you will sooner or later come across an X-Matrix. It is a visually very impressive tool, but I am in serious doubt about its usefulness. It focuses on the creation of the Hoshin items, but to me this approach is overkill, and – even worse – may distract the user from actually following the PDCA, especially the Check and Act parts. ...
    Setting the right goals and filtering them through the organization is important in Hoshin Kanri. In my first post I talked in detail about this as the "to-do list." ...
    Like the “normal” Hoshin Kanri, this document is done at different levels in the hierarchy, starting with the top executive. These are named rather straightforward as top-level matrix, second-level matrix, and third-level matrix.

    Hoshin Kanri X-matrix
    A figure:
    See right side

    Criticsm:
    Most Hoshin Kanri documents that I know cover one year. This is usually a good duration, since one year allows for quite a bit of improvement activity. This duration is also long enough to see the results and review the outcome.
    The fit with the SIAR model and PDCA DMAIC is far to nice. It solves the "closed loop" question. The template Hoshin Kanri template needs a closing arrow. The information could be included in Jabes.

    ⚙ Annual financial
    The yearly mandatory annual reports based on financial obligations should be well known.
    🤔 ❓ Are financial profits the only goal? To be honest, not❗ budgets are enabling activities whether they are personal or for an organisation.
    There should be no shortage but being overflooded with finance is 😉 waste.
    🕳👁❗Hoshin Kanri maturity evaluation.

    A-3.2.2 Wishful thinking: in control with missions
    ⚒ The proces life cycle
    Product lifecycle (wikipedia)
    In industry, product lifecycle management (PLM) is the process of managing the entire lifecycle of a product from inception, through engineering design and manufacture, to service and disposal of manufactured products. PLM integrates people, data, processes and business systems and provides a product information backbone for companies and their extended enterprise.
    ❓Why should PLM be reserved for industry of physical artefacts.?
    Situation Input Actions Results, SIAR lean structured processing
    ⚖ Mindset prerequisites: Siar model - static
    The model covers all of:
    A third dimension, hierarchy in similar structures, a cubic:
  • strategy, tactical, operational- the foundation
  • Accountabilities, responsibilities, roles
  • enterprise4

    A-3.3 Ideate Enterprise Enablement

    It turns out to be better, easier, describing what successful leaders do than teaching all leaders how to succeed. A story of the future, broad enough to adapt to change, accurate enough for competitive advantage. They called this skill "vision".
    Four challenges:
    A-3.3.1 Enterprise Culture vision
    Demings legacy and the Toyota way
    25 Years after W. Edwards Deming
    He greatly influenced the management of quality in Japan, where he is still revered as one of the great gurus in manufacturing.
    Through his influence on Toyota, his ideas are now common in the lean world.

    ⚖ Lean culture, PDCA
    ❓ what is
    real lean about?
    1. Create constancy of purpose toward improvement of product and service, with the aim to become competitive, to stay in business and to provide jobs.
    2. Adopt the new philosophy. We are in a new economic age.
      Western management must awaken to the challenge, must learn their responsibilities, and take on leadership for change.
    3. Cease dependence on inspection to achieve quality. Eliminate the need for massive inspection by building quality into the product in the first place.
    4. End the practice of awarding business on the basis of a price tag.
      Instead, minimize total cost. Move towards a single supplier for any one item, on a long-term relationship of loyalty and trust.
    5. Improve constantly and forever the system of production and service, to improve quality and productivity, and thus constantly decrease costs.
    6. Institute training on the job.
    7. Institute leadership . The aim of supervision should be to help people and machines and gadgets do a better job. Supervision of management is in need of overhaul, as well as supervision of production workers.
      (see Point 12 and Ch. 8 of Out of the Crisis).
    8. Drive out fear, so that everyone may work effectively for the company.
      (See Ch. 3 of Out of the Crisis)
    9. Break down barriers between departments.
      People in research, design, sales, and production must work as a team, to foresee problems of production and usage that may be encountered with the product or service.
    10. Eliminate slogans, exhortations, and targets for the work force asking for zero defects and new levels of productivity. Such exhortations only create adversarial relationships, as the bulk of the causes of low quality and low productivity belong to the system and thus lie beyond the power of the work force.
      1. Eliminate work standards (quotas) on the factory floor. Substitute with leadership.
      2. Eliminate management by objective. Eliminate management by numbers and numerical goals. Instead substitute with leadership.
    11. Remove barriers that rob the hourly worker of his right to pride of workmanship. The responsibility of supervisors must be changed from sheer numbers to quality.
    12. Remove barriers that rob people in management and in engineering of their right to pride of workmanship. This means, inter alia, abolishment of the annual or merit rating and of management by objectives (See Ch. 3 of Out of the Crisis).
    13. Institute a vigorous program of education and self-improvement.
    14. Put everybody in the company to work to accomplish the transformation. The transformation is everybody´s job.
    ⚖ Lean, Deadly Diseases
    Well that is
    real lean, very sensible, far more than that PDCA cycle.
    ❓ What should be avoided whith
    real lean?
    He also created a list of the “Seven Deadly Diseases,” which are also sensible.
    1. Lack of constancy of purpose
    2. Emphasis on short-term profits
    3. Evaluation by performance, merit rating, or annual review of performance
    4. Mobility of management
    5. Running a company on visible figures alone
    6. Excessive medical costs
    7. Excessive costs of warranty, fueled by lawyers who work for contingency fees

    🕳👁❗Go for
    real lean.

    A-3.3.2 Workforce enablement, structured approaches
    ⚙ The break-up of: 6W-1H
    provides some guidance for categorization of content.
    In the scope of processes: 6w 1 how Don´t force this into a fixed hierarchy role.
    Using the V-model for change and improvements is a lean approach for controlled closed loops. The A3 lean approach for solving issues in existing streams, process lines and, ideate Empathize for defining new designs.
    🕳👁❗Using
    real lean, do the needed planning and administration.

    ⚒ Context confusing: business - cyber technology
    There is a lot of misunderstanding between normal humans and their cyber colleagues.
    That culture is not necessary, should be eliminated. A translation of words to start:
    ICT Business ICT Business ICT Business
    Strategy Control - Functional Target-Value - Confidentiality People
    Tactical Orchestration - Compliancy Communication - Integrity Processes
    Operational Realization - Technical Information - Availability Machines

    Note that the asset "Information" is a business asset not something to be pushed off as something incomprehensible "cyber".
    Confusing: ICT Business
    A figure:
    See right side

    🕳👁❗Have a shared vocabulary at each layer for each domain.

    enterprise5

    A-3.4 Planning optimised lean organisations

    Optimising lean "processes: cyber/adminstrative" is the goal Jabes is helping to focus on. Value stream processes are core business lines. These are dependent on the quality & quantity of a technology connection.
    Where to pay attention on:
    A-3.4.1 Do optimize the planner, the decision maker
    🎭 Decision-Making doesn´t always improve with more data
    ❓ The hype is: getting more data would give better decisions, is that true? How to Be a Better Leader Amid Volatility, Uncertainty, Complexity, and Ambiguity
    The key to intelligent leadership in VUCA is low-data decision making.
    Low-data decision making is impossible for computers, which is why volatility causes AI to become brittle and prone to catastrophic error. But low-data decision making is an inherent power of the brain, which evolved to thrive in unpredictable environments. ...
    Prompted your brain to imagine: What if?
    To return to that earlier mindset, exit your adult brain´s bias toward abstract reasoning. Focus instead on identifying what’s unique about every person you meet and every place you visit. ... You´l know you´re picking up on the exceptional if you find yourself experiencing that childlike power to dream new tomorrows, imagining what could happen next.

    📚 Financial gaps to structured approaches
    What to evaluate at decisions:
    ❶ 💰 Not knowing a financial value possible ignores the
    real value.
    ❷ 💰 Executing by financial key performance indicators distract from
    real values.
    ❸ 💰 OpEx, CapEx are financial accounting choices not based on
    real values.
    Choices made on only financial profits can have big impact on the organisation long term life expectations. Examples:
    🕳👁❗Accept a level of uncertainties, the future is not known yet.
    🕳👁❗Don´t rely solely on financial values. Add other values preferable with metrics.

    A-3.4.2 The closed loop control
    When there is a measurement control adjustment becomes a known theory. However this theory is not simple at all. PID control (wikipedia) PID control In theory, a controller can be used to control any process that has a measurable output (PV), a known ideal value for that output (SP), and an input to the process (MV) that will affect the relevant PV.
    There is an effect: in the beginning things are going worse then expected, worse than before improvements were done. Why would the reason for that be?
    Options: Bad scenarios (continuity of the organisation becoming disputable):
    💣changing that fast, improvement moments never happen
    💣no change at all. Technical and functional debt pillowing up

    🕳👁❗Understand and manage the impact of changes.

    A-3.4.3 Translation missions visions into change
    🎭 Commnication of visions, missions
    The vision and missions should be clear defined to enable clear understanding of the intentions. An interesting name:
    Hoshin Kanri X-matrix
    ➡ Hoshin Kanri
    ➡X-matrix
    A figure:
    See right side

    Criticsm:
    It is possible to connect to this using the Jabes administrative options.
    📚 Define changes by undesrtanding vision & missions
    Going for change either using DMAIC (redesign) or PDCA (design) A pull - push flow acting on the values stream are resulting activities.
    Starting at the right bottom side, there are four stages in two lines:
    IV Ideate - Asses (pull) III Enable - Plan (pull)
    I Demand - Backend (push) II Frontend - Delivery (push)
    Jabes generic process
    A figure:
    See right side

    🕳👁❗Have changes improvements planned aligned to visions missions.
    🕳👁❗Execute changes improvements aligned to visions missions.

     legal

    A-3.5 Realizing optimised lean organisations

    Optimising lean "processes: cyber/adminstrative" is the goal Jabes is helping to focus on. Value stream processes are core business lines. These are dependent on the quality & quantity of a technology connection.
    Where to pay attention on:
    A-3.5.1 PDCA cycle administrative/cyber support
    There are many frameworks, tools that support them in a userfriendly way are hard to find for administrative/cyber processes.
    A proposal, Jabes:
    All the specifications are physical stored artifacts in a standard meta model. It is possible to export and import all specifications into another owner or onather identification.
    The meta model conforms to the layering in the nine-plane with some little differences: For every activity there is a planning and logging control dataset.
    Jabes product
    🕳👁❗Have toolings in place that
    really support frameworks for
    real lean.

    A-3.5.2 PDCA organise the enterprise in the nine-plane
    value stream
    Having all activities for a process in the nine plane, the question is what happened with the value stream for missions? The result delivery is going out at the bottom when the visualisation is having "Strategic" at the top.
    🤔 Turn the visualisation 90° counter clockwise ⟲.
    Jabes within the 9plane
    Lean - pull push
    The three "Shape" planes are the "pull" line, shaping the organisation. 🤔 Where is the "push"? Good alignment by all three lines is needed.
    Both are "push": 🕳👁❗Have a shared vocabulary at each layer for each domain.

    A-3.5.3 PDCA changing the way of change the enterprise
    Using the Jabes framework with a Jabes tooling gives a remarkable visualisation. Instead of missions - visions or organisation value streams the process of change processes is the change. devops Jabes
    🕳👁❗Be open for how to change the change process

    Confused-2

    A-3.6 Maturity 5: Controlled Enterprise Changes

    "Managing technology service" is a prerequisite for "processes: cyber/adminstrative". Although the focus should be on the value stream processes it starts by the technology connection.
    From the three TIP, Bianl interrelated scopes:
    A-3.6.1 Maturity tools "Cyber/administrative"
    A gap to a structured approach
    There is a lot of management jargon hiding the
    real goals with all uncertainties.
    ❓ Would it possible to improve and change in a more structured approach?
    pioneering 💡 Building Jabes The building of Jabes will be a lot of pioneering. A bootstrap approach while developing the product is possible. The whole of Jabes is needing several persons to
    realize for the magnitude and scope. Needed is a team with more competencies I have.
    Idea for composing a team:
    A-3.6.2 Summary Advice organisational leaders
    Maturity Basic & advanced changing the organisation. The aim, goal, to "act" is the overacrhing elementary element that also is subject to change.
    Short Context
    Plan Structure Plan decide or define. Make - refine - schedule/plan for execute
    Let it happen Do versatile: "to do", "to perform", also "add" (pull-push)
    Closed Loop Check examine in order to determine its accuracy, quality, or condition


    The points for tasks:
    Maturity id SubId Source Context
    CMM-4OO-7 Plan Structure
    RACI-1 A-2.4.3 VSM Clear accountabilities responsibilities Conceptual
    RACI-2 A-2.4.3 VSM Tasks, roles, aligned to accountabilities Conceptual
    RACI-3 A-3.5.2 Advisory Tasks, roles, aligned to accountabilities Contextual
    RACI-4 A-3.1.1 Advisory knowledge in improving the organisations Contextual
    O1 A-3.1 Hoshin Kanri basics, check act Process
    O2 A-3.2 Hoshin Kanri planning to do and do Process
    P1 A-3.3 Real lean understanding, aligning, promoting Integrity
    P2 A-3.4 Rational decision underpinning Integrity
    T1 A-3.5 Rational decision underpinning Capability
    T2 A-3.6 Rational decision underpinning Capability
    CMM-4OO-8 Let it happen
    RACI-1 A-2.4.3 VSM Clear accountabilities responsibilities Conceptual
    RACI-2 A-2.4.3 VSM Tasks, roles, aligned to accountabilities Conceptual
    RACI-3 A-3.5.2 Advisory Tasks, roles, aligned to accountabilities Contextual
    RACI-4 A-3.1.1 Advisory knowledge in improving the organisations Contextual
    O1 A-3.1 Hoshin Kanri basics, check act Process
    O2 A-3.2 Hoshin Kanri planning to do and do Process
    P1 A-3.3 Real lean understanding, aligning, promoting Integrity
    P2 A-3.4 Rational decision underpinning Integrity
    T1 A-3.5 Rational decision underpinning Capability
    T2 A-3.6 Rational decision underpinning Capability
    CMM-4OO-9 Closed loop
    RACI-1 A-2.4.3 VSM Clear accountabilities responsibilities Conceptual
    RACI-2 A-2.4.3 VSM Tasks, roles, aligned to accountabilities Conceptual
    RACI-3 A-3.5.2 Advisory Tasks, roles, aligned to accountabilities Contextual
    RACI-4 A-3.1.1 Advisory knowledge in improving the organisations Contextual
    O1 A-3.1 Hoshin Kanri basics, check act Process
    O2 A-3.2 Hoshin Kanri planning to do and do Process
    P1 A-3.3 Real lean understanding, aligning, promoting Integrity
    P2 A-3.4 Rational decision underpinning Integrity
    T1 A-3.5 Rational decision underpinning Capability
    T2 A-3.6 Rational decision underpinning Capability

    This sums up to six metrics. Half of the total number of metrics in direct influence sphere by organisational leaders.

    A-3.6.3 3M retrospective CMM-4IT - CMM-4AS - CMM-4OO
    pioneering
    ⚒ Trying to understand the "where to start" question
    It almost impossible to touch an improve a single stations in a line without touching and impacting others. Trying to do the maturity paragraph for Jabes with only the technology (SLDC) page in draft ready, I got blocked at the end. A swithc in priority, reordering to do the other two in draft also. The reason is simple: the perspectives in each pillar are different although it is the same topic, same concepts same context.
    Surprising: aligning optimising (bianl) is the most complex topic:
    A-3.6.4 Following steps
    retrospective
    Going trough all this again, some experience from the past are resurrected: The switch to how to improve something is a np-hard problem.

    other pages
    Missing link devops bpmc design_sdlc devops bpm devops sdlc devops bianl
    These are design sdlc concepts, others:

    Data
    The ready to use technology available in the market.

    Serve previous,
    Technology SDLC Development Life cycle (next)

    Steer previous,
    Business organisation value streams



      
    🎯 101-IS VM-VMs Ideate-EE Plan-EE DO-4OO CMM5-4OO 🎯
      
    🚧  TIP Risk O-ALC Gemba Stations DO PDCA CMM4-4OO 🚧
      
    🔰 Contents Frame-ref OR Forest Metrics DO LSS CMM3-4OO 🔰

    © 2012,2020,2024 J.A.Karman
    🎭 Concerns & Indices Elucidation 👁 Summary Vitae 🎭