Attached is a front page design for a possible visual map of the SoPK.
I am interested in knowing if any at the cove would be interested in contributing to this visual map. I believe access to this type of information would be beneficial to all at the cove when debating :rolleyes: This great subject. It could be a standardized cove interpretation of the Sopk and would assist all at the cove who may wish to have a distinct Cove interpretation.
I know Kevin Mader may be interetsed in contributing to this visual map, am I right Kevin???
Feedback from all at the Cove would be appreciated.
Wallace.

I envisage the Sopk Visual map to be an overview that can be used for discussion and debate purposes at the Cove.
I understand completely that the so-called Sopk map will change according to our understanding yet, I believe that we should have consensus (When possible) regarding the information as an overview that will be added to the Visual map. I discussed this with Kevin Mader via telephone on Monday regarding this issue.
The reason for creating a Sopk map?
I have come across way too many folk who are genuinely interested in the theories and facts behind a SoPK and have expressed an interest in having a mapped reference of this fascinating area.
Wallace.

I'd be very interested in the map and more than willing to help anyway I can. Good idea Wallace.

Here's a start to the map.
Make your contributions to the specific branch of the map. The principle of Mind mapping asks you to compile information in as few words as possible, using key and associated words that will speak to the reader and allow an overview to become the big picture.
You can either send them to the Cove thread or send them to my private mail mw.tait@sympatico.ca I'll be adding to the map and posting it as a zipped jpeg file occasionaly.
The program I am using to compile the map is called Mind genius www.mindgenius.com, I also use another excellent program called Visual Mind www.visual-mind.com
Wallace.

Sorry that I didn't catch your initial post on this, Wallace, but the call got my mind stirring a bit on your challenge.

I guess that the first contribution that I'd like to make centers about our phone conversation as to what, if any, is the most important tenet to the SoPK. As I mentioned, Dr. Deming saw them all equally important. But as Peter Senge asserts, System's Thinking is the glue that holds it all together.

Something both Deming and Senge state repeatedly is/was the concept of time. Deming always had his eye on the future, thus stating that when determining the AIM of the system, one must consider that the AIM has to be in the context of the Future. Senge expands the view, thus giving us several examples of how time changes the manner in which we view and learn things. Nonetheless, time/future plays a factor in determining how we choose to define Appreciation of a System.

This is easier said than done.

Some years back, I was involved in a discussion with Del Nelson and David Kerridge when I was trying to create a visual representation of a system. I elected to use a Venn Diagram to illustrate the system components each with their individual AIMS and the central AIM of the system. What I wasn't able to illustrate was the AIM through time. I stumped the professors on this one. So, that said, here is the challenge reintroduced through Wallace's challenge. I think that this is an extremely important factor to consider. It is also considerably important for us to figure out because the exclusion of this will truncate the model.

Back to the group....

Kevin :bigwave:

My attempt to create a System Model.

Kevin

Maybe what you guys propose will help people to know and understand Deming's SOPK. Webster defines profound as 1a: having intellectual depth and insight 1b: difficult to fathom or understand

I think the second definition must be as valid as the first in this context, because while I have read Deming I don't recall his SOPK points, nor do I know anyone who does, and I didn't recall it as being earth-shattering. Maybe that is mostly due to my intellectual limitations, but I believe no matter how great the idea, if you can't make the masses understand it and see its usefulness it will never be nearly as helpful as it could be. IMO either Deming's SOPK isn't nearly as great as its proponents say it is or else it was never made understandable to enough people to catch on.

Mike S,
I agree with your concern that, whatever a SoPK is supposed to convey to the reader, it should be clear and unambiguous knowledge transfer allowing the reader to view the big picture regarding systems. I firmly believe that a SoPK should not be limited to being used within business alone.

Kevin,
I have added the following side bar to the proposed map, what do you think?

"It should be recognized that, A system of profound knowledge by nature continuously evolves in relation to knowledge development of the four parts of a SoPK"

Wallace

IMO either Deming's SOPK isn't nearly as great as its proponents say it is or else it was never made understandable to enough people to catch on.

You are right, Mike S.

By the test of "is it of practical value outside of the Deming 'bible study' groups?" the SoPK fails.

No [Western] manager understands all that stuff. It is either wonderful theory yet to be demonstrated as useful. Or it is hokum. One thing is clear: it is technique not [yet?] technology. Phlogiston not air. IMO also.

Something both Deming and Senge state repeatedly is/was the concept of time. Deming always had his eye on the future, thus stating that when determining the AIM of the system, one must consider that the AIM has to be in the context of the Future



I think I have posted this on a thread sometime in the past but Kevin's comments on the concept of time triggered me to think about Ackoff's views on learning.

He distinguishes between data, information, knowledge, understanding, and wisdom as follows:

DATA - consists of symbols that represent objects, events, and their properties. Data is the product of observation.

INFORMATION - is contained in descriptions, in answers to questions that begin with such words as WHO, WHAT, WHERE, WHEN and HOW MANY. Information is usable in deciding what to do, not how to do it.

KNOWLEDGE - is contained in instructions. Knowledge consists of know-how, for example, knowing how a system works or how to make it work in a desired way, and it makes maintenance and control of objects, systems, and events possible.

UNDERSTANDING - is contained in explanations, answers to WHY questions. We do not learn how to do something by doing it correctly because we already know how to do it. We gain understanding by doing things through trial and error and making mistakes.

WISDOM - the ability to perceive and evaluate the long-run consequences of behavior.

So...I agree with what Kevin has stated - TIME is a critical element to be considered when looking at the SoPK.

Ackoff seems to use the term wisdom to represent what Deming may have called profound knowledge.

Wisdom (profound knowledge) allows you to project information, knowledge, and understanding of a system into the future.

If you look at the Theory of Knowledge (understanding knowledge) leg it speaks to a "future state".
Creation, Development, Transfer, Improvement, can all be future focused. I believe it is in this group where the real time model can be best pointed towards the future. JMO

No [Western] manager understands all that stuff.
I agree. Necessity has never dictated that we encompass the pure meaning. And in that too, due to the lack of understanding, it causes the corporate cultural change more problems.

Wisdom (profound knowledge) allows you to project information, knowledge, and understanding of a system into the future.
I'll have to chase the old college books for the root word, but the Hebrew word for knowledge symbolized a change in life. You did not "know" something unless it changed your life.
I somewhat agree with your statement, but wisdom alone does not allow you to project information. It's the knowledge of teaching and transfer that allows us to project that knowledge.
Like my old signature said: Communication without intelligence is noise, intelligence without communication is irrelevant. :thedeal:

Latest map development.
Wallace

Wallace,

I have my thinking cap on, and will try to provide some input.
In the mean time: I searched for SoPK and got a good number of hits, but to save time: Can you suggest a good website for reading more about it?

/Claes

Claes,
Try this site.
http://deming.eng.clemson.edu/pub/den/
Wallace.

Got it... Thank's

/Claes

Latest map development.
Wallace, one item I would suggest is that under Psychology we add World View or prejudices.
I think it was Socrates that said we create our views by standing on the shoulders of our predecessors. We build upon what is being passed down and in doing so adopt a certain amount of prejudices. IMO we can't understand motivation without understanding the prejudices another may or may not have.

Randy,
You make a valid point when speaking of a "World view" and the relation to "predjudice".
I have found that the "World view" that you mention may be conveyed as a "View of reality".
A view of reality may be defined as a current and personal world view in relation to what is known and, the knowledge that is known facilitates a world view. A personal reality can and does change according to knowledge transfer and successful understanding of the transfered information.
I would say that a "World view" may be a concensus view and a personal view of reality, well that's the start.
Wallace.

The SoPK map latest,
Feedback would be appreciated?
I intend to make the map information as generic as possible, this shall make it accessible to those who are not involved in the quality arena and, I'm considering using English in the third person, so as to detatch from making the map a single source interpretation.
The map shall change as time goes on and also, when changes are offered by cove participants.
Wallace.

The latest additions have been added and numbered for clarity and, for feedback purposes.
Fire away matey's.
Wallace.

Wallace, just a couple of observations here.
Read your statement in the top box, about continuously evolving. Then read 2.1 under system thinking. They almost sound contradictory.

Randy,
Thanks for the feedback, I appreciate your participation.
I have to say that parts of the map may be altered or deleted according to feedback, so the map is at the development stages at this point and may be so for some time until a concensus is finalized, it's all over the place right now.
Regarding your comment re- 2.1, would you please elaborate on your observation of an apparent contradiction between the statement at the head of the map and 2.1, I'm trying hard to see what may be obvious to you.
Thanks again Randy for your feedback.
Wallace.

It may be a bit nick picky, I guess it's the auditor in me :eek: . But in your top box it states ". . . by nature continuously evolves in relation to knowledge creation . . .". I understand what it is saying here. Then in 2.1 it states that " . . . related and interdependent in such a manner, that by adjusting and optimizing one part the other parts may suffer loss".
If I'm reading this correctly then, as knowledge grows (evolves, adjusts) the rest of the system may suffer loss.

One other observation I'd like to ask about is:
Variation, Theory of knowledge and Psychology all talk of natural (even mentioned in 1.1.1.1) events and I can easily see their interconnection. However, with #2 Systems thinking there seems to be a missing link. Or, if you would, the odd man out.
There is variation, in the way we learn, in our psychology and understanding psychology can assist in learning, etc.
It seems to me that the Systems Thinking leg is linked inside theory of knowledge or the template that the framework for SoPK is based upon.
I know this isn't a finished product and I'm not just trying to tear it apart, but I think we need to spend some time on how the S-T portion is actually integrated into the model. As it stands right now, it looks to be more of a precursor to the understanding of the model than part of the model itself. With that being said I may have answered my own question! I'll look at it some more.

Randy,
Parts of the map, as I have said, are still very much in the scattered thought stages. I completely understand your thoughts to date. I have slightly changed the 2.1 statement for clarity (I'll post it when I get more feedback). The map is going to be made up of generic language that will speak to the reader in an objective manner (Hopefully) and, I believe it's more advantageous to use language in the third person, so as to detach the contributors from implanting "personal world views" of their understanding of a SoPK.

Randy, feel free to submit changes to the map, I'm looking for a concensus "world view". I'll spend a lot more time on the map if there is more commitment and involvement form folk such as youself.
Again, the map is meant to be an overview that will allow all who wish to understand the theories and concepts that are called a SoPK.
Wallace.

It seems that the Systems piece is lagging a bit, to Randy's point. So here is something to perhaps increase our group thinking.

In Dr. Deming’s words, “What is the AIM of the System?” or, in Peter Senge’s words, “What do we want to create?”

Important questions. While Systems Thinking holds together the other tenets of the SoPK, it is the vision that holds together the components of a system. A vision must generate commitment, personal and as a group. The vision will mean the same to the individual as it does to the group. It has to as the aim of the vision itself generates the commitment to transcend time and space and offer more than compliance. Most Quality Policies, Mission Statements, and Company Visions can only generate some level of compliance, meaning folks don’t feel or live them, the merely follow the rules. How many times have you read your Quality Policy and shook your head in disappointment? Me: many times.

Regards,

Kevin

Good to know you are "in" Kevin.
Post or personaly mail me your proposed changes to the map.
It's a pity you don't use the same program that I'm using to compile the SoPK map.
I can forward to you an official unlock for the Visual Mind program, If you wish, go to www.visual-mind.com and download the program. This would allow us to be on the same page regarding drafting the SoPK map.
I'm using Mind genius www.mindgenius.com to compile the map as you see it posted at the cove.

I want to say that the psychology area of a SoPK is my area of specific interest and, I may indeed tend to consentrate on this area. Being a systems thinker I understand that my consentrating on the psychology area does and shall indeed cause my contribution to the SoPK map to be a contradiction to the statement of 2.1 within the map yet, I can say with conviction that systems thinking is an on-going learning cycle, and
is indeed a jouney of personal discovery.
Again, if you have any proposals to the map, post them and they'll be added for review and revision purposes within the map. It's open to everyone who has a passion for systems thinking.
Wallace.

I'm 'in'. I thought that this week would be less busy, but thus far, I'm wrong (again).

I'll check out the links you've left for downloads and with IT's blessing, I might make it a reality.

Well, off to the races. More tomorrow.

Kev

I have been keeping a keen eye on the discussions surrounding SoPK lately, but haven't been able to add much of any value. Kudos and thanks to all contributors! I'm learning a lot from your posts.

I think SoPK is where my organization has to head eventually. In any case, I've been doing a lot of research on the Net and reading on Deming Theory (buying Deming books for $0.75-$2.00 from Half.com....what a steal!) to try to build my case for such a transition.

Per the issue of flushing out the Systems Thinking element of the model that you folks are trying to create, I came across a summary that I think may help you do that. (Of course, I can't remember from which web site I found it.) In the summary of SoPK, it broke the 4 elements down. Here's what it had for System Thinking:

Appreciation for a System
• You will only get what the system will deliver
• At least 94% of troubles and possibilities for improvement belong to the system
• A system is a network of interdependent components that work together to try to accomplish an aim
• Aim - a system must have an aim - management sets the aim with input everyone must understand the aim
• Systems are management's responsibility
• Management's job is to optimize the entire system over time
o Over time requires innovation
o 85% of the impact is in the first 15% of the process
o Loyal customers is the focus

I've also attached the entire document that covers the other 3 areas of SoPK for your review. Hope this helps.

All the Best-
Tom

tschones,
Thanks for your contribution and participation.


Attached is the latest additions to the SoPK map, I have added 4.2 and 5, including all of the associated branches.
Add your critical thinking contributions all.
Wallace.

I just noticed a graphical error in the zip file appearance, attached is the correction.
Wallace.

Attached is the latest revision of the SoPK map.
K'mon guys contribute to the map, It's a big hit at my location.
Wallace.

http://deming.ces.clemson.edu/pub/den/deming_philosophy.htm#sopk

I haven't had much time to go over it but here are some inputs for "AIM".

Something else came to mind; under Theory of Knowledge I suggest we develop the communication leg.
3.2 Communication
3.2.1 verbal
3.2.2 written
3.2.3 visual

Aim
must agree with core values
must encompass motivation(s)
must align with beliefs & percieved mission
must help define identity
must be within "real" capabilities
must be communicatable (?)

5.4 The aim must be defined

5.2.2 Vision is understood
5.2.1 Resonable/obtainable
5.3.1 Shared importance
5.3.2 Agreed upon urgency

Under psychology should we include the Id or ego?

Randy,
Thanks for the in-put and feedback.
I have edited and added your proposals to the map.
I'm considering braking the map up into the 5 current sections, so as to, facilitate an easier access allowing feddback and in-put to be specific to the sections of particular interest to those who wish to participate and view the SoPK map as it develops.
I would like to offer Systems thinking, theory of knowledge and aim up to those who wish to take a lead in the feedback and development of these particular sections. I am and have been consentrating on the psychology section.
Let me know if you think it would be beneficial to break the map up into the proposed 5 sections as separate maps for the time being, until the map has come to some form of draft and final draft.
I fully intend on passing the finalized map oveer to a group within the Cove who may wish to review, possibly revise and renew parts that need attention.
Wallace.

Attached are the latest revisions to the SoPK visual map.
Make your comments and suggestions, they're all welcome.
Wallace.

Wallace,

After reviewing the latest file:

This was a good idea! The model is succesful in illustrating the magnitude (thus far defined) of what is in play. Too much to convey in any short period to most anyone. This is the kind of visual aid that will create lots of thought and questions. I think it will be a useful tool.

Regards,

Kevin :bigwave:

Thanks Kevin,
The creation and continuous development of the SoPK visual map is becoming an excellent experience for me and, I hope for others at the Cove.
I can say that my view of reality in relation to the SoPK as it has been mapped out, has changed and shifted as it has developed, This has reinforced my view of "profound knowledge" as being a developing (Or evolving system).
I am eager to have the open participation of those at the Cove who would dare to become part of the information exchange through this thread. The very nature of a SoPK compells us to make this a collaborative effort.
Wallace.

I will look at the new model this weekend, I hope. I know I have a couple questions for you but will see if I can answer them by going over the new diagram.

As you said in the How do we promote creativity? (http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=6953) thread: Data from the mindmap there could be used in the SoPK map as well. Be my guest :D

/Claes :agree:

I've been keeping an eye on this thread so as to measure the response to the SoPK mapped information.
I'm getting the impression that it may be intimidating and causing some to refrain from contributing. I want to let all of you potential contributors know that, this map is a collaborative interpretation of A System Of Profound Knowledge, nothing more and nothing less.
The Cove memebers who have contributed thus far have shown they are systems thinkers and, revealing themselves as system thinkers has shown that they acknowledge the development (Or evolution) of information contained within knowledge.
The map is intended to benefit all at the Cove. When it is completed, print it, post it, share it with your colleauges and employees, in other words use it to convey and share what a system is and all of the associated functions of a SoPK.
I hope this map shall encourage some to become system thinkers, it's not religious, it's not faith based and it's certainly not esoteric, it's free to all Cove members who wish to use it.
Wallace.

I guess this thread seems to be redundant.
This is what I'll do, I'll only update the SoPK map if there are any contributions to it. I'll give it another couple of weeks before I decide to complete the map and then, I'll withdraw the completed map for viewing at the Cove. I'm kinda busy right now and it doesn't seem fair to take space at the Cove with a subject that doesn't seem to be drawing the interest of Cove members.
Wallace.

No, don't withdraw it. It's a good map and one of the great things here is the possibility to search for things. Ask Marc to put it in the files list instead.

/Claes

Hei Claes,
Tusen Takk for det!
One of the reasons for a possible withdrawal of the map from the Cove is that, I have received lots of interest from others outwith the Cove.
The completed map is going to be extremely usefull to those who wish to use it as a motivational visual aid.
I would rather support the Cove by getting it completed right here at the Cove yet, it's clear that there is either a lack of interest or a lack of knowledge of a SoPK or both and, I'm a learner, not a teacher.
Having said this, I have to follow the intentions of a SoPK and be aware that there shall be some who wish to contribute to the map such as, Randy, Kevin and yourself, we all live busy lives I guess.
Wallace.

Wallace,

With over 40 replies and 700 views why complain about lack of interest? I have not contributed because I know little of Deming's "SoPK" but wouldn't mind learning about it -- especially in a simple, distilled way. So I am just waiting to see the final product from people who understand it better than I. I'll bet many others feel the same way. Don't stop now!

I have been busy lately, it's that time of year for me. I have a 14001 audit coming up in 3 weeks and a compliance review in a couple days at all 3 sites.

Thanks for the support,
I guess it's up to the potential contributors to keep it going.
Wallace.

Here you go, latest revision.
Wallace

Right. I'll have a look at it tonight.

/Claes

Don't worry Wallace. As you know, most Demingites go sniffing for things like this. They'll find it.

Don't under estimate your passion - it's what distinguishes you!!

Regards,

Kevin :bigwave:

I can't open the file.

I can't open the file.
Same here. What is a .wmf file, and what should I use to read it?

Sorry guys,
I'm getting a name for myself re- messing up attachments.
The program I'm using allows me to save maps as image files such as windows meta file, bit map, Jpg.
I've saved the map as a bitmap and zipped the file, you should be able to read the file as a bitmap. The graphics won't be that great viewing it as a bitmap but, it's the best I can do using the mapping program I'm using at this time.
Wallace.

Hi Folks, :bigwave:
I would like to resurect this thread.
Any takers??? :smokin:
Wallace.

Wallace,
I don't have anything to contribute, but I'm finding the topic very interesting, if that helps. I just printed your attachment and it will be good reading/studying over Christmas break.
Happy Holidays!

Mustang,
I don't have anything to contribute

Oh yes you do Mustang. ;)
Read the map for a few days and, I 'm convinced you shall get a handle on the mapped interpretation of a SoPK. It's been my experience that, anyone who reads the map tends to be motivated to start thinking in a systems manner. It becomes rather addictive to say the least. :eek:
The map is meant to be as generic as possible and, I'm hoping the map can be applied to many area's of potential use. If you have any in-put for the map, please don't hesitate in posting your proposals.
Wallace.

Wallace,

I am impressed with the effort and results to date. The MAP is impressive and as you indicated can be intimidating, especially as it grows, but I could understand how most of the items came to be after reading the various posts. You have done a great job in facilitating this activity (And you said you were not a teacher)! The following are my current thoughts or questions on the subject matter:

When I re-read the excerpts you and rrramirez posted, having read a compilation of Deming's philosophy a few years back, I wonder about 'The Aim' being part and parcel with System Thinking. Whereas when I read it, The Aim is for the Transformation of the Individual via an understanding of the System of Profound Knowledge to "perceive new meaning to his life, to events, to numbers, to interactions between people"... to "apply its principles in every kind of relationship with other people. He will have a basis for judgment of his own decisions and for transformation of the organizations that he belongs to." I do not get that impression when Aim is inside the system itself.

Is this MAP to help us understand the principles Deming espoused, or is it actually laying out another system? I do not have any of Demings work in front of me to double check this concern.

The layout of profound knowledge appears here in four parts, all related to each other:
· Appreciation for a system
· Knowledge about variation
· Theory of knowledge
· Psychology
One need not be eminent in any part nor in all four parts in order to understand it and to apply it. The 14 points for management in industry, education, and government follow naturally as application of this outside knowledge, for transformation from the present style of Western management to one of optimization.

"Appreciation for a system" is a statement of affect not an understanding or application of some set of rules or conceptualizations, is it not? You might come back with, how can you 'feel' for something that you may not 'understand' - for which I do not have a good answer, but the point I am making is that currently the MAP identifies an understanding of how System Thinking plays a part in the System of Profound Knowledge, as oppose to the appreciation for a system.

My last thought for this post is in regards to this excerpt"
"A leader of transformation, and managers involved, need to learn the psychology of individuals, the psychology of a group, the psychology of society, and the psychology of change." Are these psychologies covered in the MAP?

Thanks,
Doug

Dr. Deming often repeated this phrase (or something very close), “A system without an AIM is not a system.” The AIM is used to establish the Purpose of the system and to provide a beacon. This is directly related to his statement of Constancy of Purpose outlined in his 14 Points for Management.

Now, there are many systems that we might take part in. How is this System defined? What components make up the System? Are the individual component AIMs in conflict with the System AIM, or are they in harmony with it? For most, the System starts out small and grows as one becomes more familiar with the interrelationships. Transformation, for instance, begins on the individual level. Once the individual becomes strong (not necessarily masters) with SoPK, they should move on to expand application of it to the System. This will occur in graduations. As more of the components in the System become aware (enlightened), the system begins to expand to another layer. The learning is exponential.

I’m happy to see this thread revisited and having new contributors to the map. It will be interesting to see what Mustang makes of the over holiday review. The perspectives of those not familiar with the SoPK might lead us to greater insight into how we might improve it’s readability.

Regards,

Kevin

Dr. Deming often repeated this phrase (or something very close), “A system without an AIM is not a system.” The AIM is used to establish the Purpose of the system and to provide a beacon. This is directly related to his statement of Constancy of Purpose outlined in his 14 Points for Management.

Exactly, the AIM is for the entire system not just a subset of a system element. It drives the system. How would you show that on a MAP?

Doug

Hmmmm....good question, Doug!!

I don't know if I mentioned it earlier in this thread, but probably somewhere else in the Cove for sure. The MAP must capture a sense of the future. How do we capture a dynamic thing in an otherwise static model? This is a challenge for sure.

In the past, I used Venn Diagrams to illustrate the System Components (not the 4 precepts that make up SoPK). Each circle illustrated a subsystem or component with its own AIM. In the overlapping area of all the circles representing each component is the System AIM. A convenient illustration to illustrate the interrelationship of the components, but it lacked having the ability to illustrate time (future). The AIM will need to be revised to reflect changes over time.

I'll keep thinking about this. I hope it is a question we can all contribute to answering!!

Regards,

Kevin

Hi all,
It's interesting to see where this thread is going, isn't it?

Is this MAP to help us understand the principles Deming espoused, or is it actually laying out another system?

Good question Doug.
My initial intentions for the SoPK map was to, encourage systems thinkers to come out of the proverbial closet. Systems thinking has for too long been tagged as something that is almost esoteric.
The direct answer to your question is Yes and No.
Yes, the SoPK map is intended to espouse Dr Demings theories but, no, I didn't intend perpetuating Dr Demings theories as, It's clear by the very nature of profound knowledge that, it must evolve (I prefer the word develop).
It's equaly clear that the current state of the map doesn't distincly express IMO what Dr Deming may have taught regarding profound knowledge.
I firmly believe though that,what is being accomplished here is, a collaborative interpretation of A system of profound knowledge and not, "THE" system of profound knowledge espoused by Dr Deming. I have way too much respect for the late Dr to even tread on the well established foundational grounds of his interpretation of a SoPK.
Now let me be very clear. IMO FWIW, I believe the map should be as generic as possible and, be made available to anyone who wishes to use it as a motivational visual that may encourage discussions that develop into the beginings of systems thinking. This would be a great achievment indeed.
The map in its current state is, I believe, a motivational visual that is ready for viewing in general, after all the map shouldn't be seen as containing complexity. I believe the map should be made as simplified as possible without dumbing down the whole concept of profound knowledge.
Regarding Aim, Kevin included that branch and I placed it within the systems thinking branch of the map and, I agree that is where it should remain until changed by concensus.
Doug, I believe your in-put to the map for further development would be coveted, especially by me.
Since I am one of the developers of the Visual Mind program I would ask those who wish to genuinely contribute to the map to mail me with their thoughts on having a complimentary copy of the program for the purpose of standardising the format of the map rather than me being the sole developer and distributor of the SoPK map? I have come up with two (2) main names for this proposal, Kevin Mader and Randy Stewart. I'm hoping that Douglas Purdy shall accept this proposal too.
Well, are you takers guys? ;)
Wallace.

...
Since I am one of the developers of the Visual Mind program I would ask those who wish to genuinely contribute to the map to mail me with their thoughts on having a complimentary copy of the program for the purpose of standardising the format of the map rather than me being the sole developer and distributor of the SoPK map? I have come up with two (2) main names for this proposal, Kevin Mader and Randy Stewart. I'm hoping that Douglas Purdy shall accept this proposal too.
Well, are you takers guys? ;)
Wallace.

I like to think that I give more than I take, but I guess it is all relational! As for standardizing the format of the MAP, I would bow to Kevin or Randy who probably have more of a stake in propegating Deming's system (I have not been very successful in such matters). To transform a style of management requires alot of different items to happen and I know that I do not know, or have an established system for achieving such a transformation.

...
Regarding Aim, Kevin included that branch and I placed it within the systems thinking branch of the map and, I agree that is where it should remain until changed by concensus.

As Kevin stated, how do you capture a dynamic happening in a static model? (Parenthetically, I think I would want to show the pre-requisites to the system either in the subject branch or to its left even in a 'Pre-requisite Color.')

Merry Christmas!
Doug

The map of a SoPK map seems to come and go.
:thanx: Thanks to all the contributors so far.
As we're reaching the end of this year, are there any comments as to, where you believe the map should head regarding interpretation and direction?
All the best for 2004 when it gets to you. :bigwave:
Wallace.

Happy New Year everybody!!

Wallace,

I'm afraid to ask, but was this the software you sent me already?? To give you an idea of my delinquency with keeping up with emails (I have around 1600 unopened emails at home) and with keeping up with threads (I see many newer contributors have dwarfed my 950 or so postings), I still have the software you sent me in its original package (sorry, but it arrived about the time my daughter did and, well, one thing led to another). If not, I'm game to recieve a copy to help support the effort.

Regards,

Kevin :bigwave:

Hei Kevin, :bigwave:
The software I sent you a looooong time ago may even be a different program. Having said this, the current version of Visual Mind (6) is way ahead of what I sent you previously.
What I'll do is, send you an E-mail with download instructions and a complimentary serial key for use.
To date Randy Stewart, Dougles Purdy and yourself are the takers of the program. My purpose is to get the program infused and, receive feedback on your needs and wants for Visual Mind development. I'm in the process of getting a special offer arranged for registered members at the Cove who, wish to use the Visual Mind 6 (PC) program and purchase the unlock serials at a reasonable discount.
Kevin forward to me an E-mail address that you shall be able to receive the download instructions and serial key.
All the best Kevin.
Wallace.

I'm working on changing the SoPK map to a Visual Mind 6 format, for the purposes of standardizing the communications of those Cove members who may choose to download and consider purchase the VM6 program. :cool:
There are a few users of VM6 to date at the cove and, it just seems more convenient to communicate and exchange information in a standardized VM6 format. This shall allow those of us who use VM6 to send and receive from each other, mapped information or converted mapped information, in the form of Word, Powerpoint or Image files. I'm negotiating a discounted offer for registered Cove members at this time :thedeal: and, I'll post the outcome when ready.
Wallace. :bigwave:

Attached is a zipped jpeg file of the SoPK map in a visual mind 6 format.
For those of you who have the program or are test driving the program at this time, Mail me and I'll send the VM file to you for review and change purposes.
Wallace.

As a disclaimer after a number of comments and questions to me, I want to ensure everyone understands that I do not endorse the Visual Mind software being promoted nor is there any connection between myself and the Visual Minds folks and/or Wallace. I was provided a copy of the program to evaluate and did so briefly. It appears to do what it says it will, but as I explained to Wallace, it's not software I would use personally.

But by not endorsing it, I am NOT saying it is bad software. It's just not something I would use to 'think' with. My personal preference in software for thinking and systems, which I have stated elsewhere, are Stella and ithink. http://www.hps-inc.com/

This thread is now closed, but is being followed up on in this thread: http://Elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=7875