Collective Intelligence drives Social and Individual Actions


Collective Intelligence is the group intelligence that emerges in adaptive environments where it drives decision-making and actions. Therefore, it is in the minds of the members of the groups. It increases notoriously the effectiveness of the solutions and the efficacy of groups while it minimizes conflicts.

The collective intelligence of an individual allows apprehending the triadic structure of things and building the binary actions, objects, and catalysts to influence the environment and generate results. Adapting to a specific field requires having the collective intelligence to apprehend it. Individual intelligence does not suffice.

There is a possibility of building a high level of collective intelligence in environments that have a low level of collective intelligence. It requires building a group that works as an Avant Garde group and is recognized as a reference group because of its generation of value. This group needs to have a mystique that should have been earned outside the boundaries of the environment.

The Functionality of Collective Intelligence

The discovery of collective intelligence, published in December 2015, allowed finding the roots of adaptive behavior. CCollective intelligence is the driver of empathic and influential behavior and establishes the mental approach to develop strategies and make a functional approach to the real world.

Collective intelligence allows building synergy among the members of a society or group to better adapt to the environment. Collective intelligence is the driver of value-adding actions in any environment. It is easily noticeable in animals, such as ants and rats. It enhances their survival capacity and the expansion of their species.

Collective intelligence builds a bridge between the archetypes and lifestyles of cultures and the social, institutional, and individual behavior. Individual intelligence is always enhanced or inhibited by the lifestyle of culture and the myths of groups, which are driven by the fundamentals of the cultural archetype.

The framework of conscious collective intelligence

Collective intelligence provides behavioral patterns that establish the cohabitation rules of a society or a group and define who is a member and who is an alien. It includes the transcendent and immanent aspects of behavior.

The collective intelligence of a society is driven by the archetype of a culture and becomes materialized in its lifestyle.

Although different groups of a society might have different habits according to their interests and possibilities, there is a common lifestyle defined by the collective intelligence that establishes the patterns of acceptable behavior. Those who do not follow these patterns are considered aliens.

Collective intelligence is the intelligence that allows social capital building, institutionalizing and organizing teamwork.

The level of collective intelligence defines the level of development of a culture and the level of functionality of a group. Thus, the power of a culture or a group is given by the functionality of its collective intelligence. In this sense, the Japanese culture is a paradigmatic example of collective intelligence.

There is a possibility for building a high level of collective intelligence in environments that have a low level of collective intelligence. It requires building a group that is recognized as a reference group because of its generation of value, that needs to have a mystique.

Collective intelligence is shared or group intelligence that emerges from the collaboration, collective efforts, and competition of individuals and is implicit in any human action that deals with the environment and consensus decision-making. 

The Unicist Approach to Collective Intelligence

Collective Intelligence is the group intelligence that emerges in adaptive environments where it drives decision-making and actions. Therefore, it is in the minds of the members of the groups.

The research on collective intelligence demonstrated that the environment defines the possibilities of the existence and enhancement of collective intelligence.

It also demonstrated that it is possible to enhance collective intelligence by establishing cultural contexts that sustain constructivism and the use of self-criticism despite the dysfunctional influences of the wide context.

The purpose of collective intelligence is to achieve the goals implicit of the archetype of a culture. The archetype defines the driver of collective intelligence that fosters or inhibits individual intelligence in the development of solutions. The context of the archetype is sustained by the restricted context of the belonging group that reinforces the functionality of the archetype to sustain solutions.

The problem of cultures that are in transition is that their archetypes do not sustain a specific purpose. Therefore, the natural response of people who work in these environments is individualism to have a place in the context. This natural response hinders the building of collective intelligence.

In these environments it is necessary, although not always possible, to establish a superior cultural environment that allows people to find their place in a micro-culture. To achieve this, groups need to have the necessary mystique that allows them to work as a micro-culture with an influence that exceeds the influence of the environment.

The gravitational force of collective intelligence is the existence of a constructivist wide context that establishes the basic rules for collective intelligence that is sustained by a solution-thinking approach, a root cause management environment in an action-reflection-action environment.

Collective intelligence allows expanding the boundaries of the solutions that are used in an environment. The use of functional knowledge makes the constructivist approach possible. It implies managing the know-how and the know-why of things to make the expansion of the boundaries of solutions possible.

The ontogenetic map of Conscious Collective Intelligence

The final purpose of collective intelligence is achieving the goals of the cultural archetype that is implicit in the group. When the groups are cross-cultural or part of cultures that are in transition, it becomes necessary to generate a context that has the necessary ethics to sustain the activities of the groups.

Every culture has accepted short paths that sustain the automatic behavior of their members. These short paths work as natural inhibitors for any action that expands the boundaries of the solutions. Therefore, it is necessary to have the capacity to have the functional knowledge that underlies the short paths to overcome them.

Collective intelligence can work modifying the short-paths but cannot modify the fallacious myths of cultures. Fallacious myths protect weaknesses of a culture that cannot be accepted by its members.

Therefore, there is no possibility of disrespecting the limits established by the fallacious myths. It can only be overcome by developing a superior solution that solves problems without exposing the weaknesses that cannot be accepted.

The Maximal Strategy

The use of collective conscious intelligence requires that the participants of groups have a value-adding approach. This establishes the basic condition for the existence of collective intelligence.

The reactive intelligence which includes the intellectual intelligence, the emotional intelligence, and the speed of elaboration of frustrations (resilience) needs to be able to sustain the necessary empathy to be, able to establish a collective intelligence.

The active intelligence of the members of the group implies that the members have the necessary functional intelligence that allows them to access the concepts and manage intrapersonal and interpersonal relationships.

The Minimum Strategy

The collective intelligence tends to be limited by the interest of the group. When this is the case there is no possibility for developing value-adding solutions for the environment. What needs to be ensured is that the groups are build establishing objectives and satisfy interests that are fully compatible with the cultural archetype.

It needs to be clarified that the values of the group and the values of the environment are complementary in terms of the application field and not in terms of their essential functionality. The values of the groups need to be redundant with the values of the culture while their influence is complementary.

These groups have natural short paths for their members that need to be overcome. This requires developing superior solutions that are confirmed by their functionality. Pilot tests are the natural pathway to confirm the functionality of new solutions.

The culture has fallacious myths to sustain their weaknesses, and this is also the case of groups. These fallacious myths build by groups can only be solved by developing solutions that include the fallacious myth and avoid the exposure of the unacceptable weaknesses of the group.

Finally, collective intelligence begins to work when it can integrate the needs of the activities of a group and avoid inconsistency with the interests of the group and of the environment.

Levels of Collective Intelligence

The level of collective intelligence of a group defines the level of complexity of the problems that can be managed:

  1. Reactive Intelligence, for simple problem solving
  2. Conservative Intelligence, for complicated problem solving
  3. Constructive Intelligence, for complex problem solving
  4. Synergic Intelligence, for complex adaptive problem solving
Unicist ontogenetic map of conscious collective intelligence

Reactive Intelligence

This collective intelligence is basically driven by analogical thinking and is functional to respond to simple problems based on the experience of the participants.

This collective intelligence uses experiences to develop solutions. It focuses on problem-solving based on best practices and analogical benchmarks.  It is strongly influenced by the experience of the participants of a group.

It does not differentiate the triggering causes from root causes and works in simple operational environments. The interpersonal exchange is based on the facts that are being managed and the use of brainstorming when the environment is uncertain.

Conservative Intelligence

The conservative intelligence is based on using an analogical-analytical approach to manage complicated problems where the solutions are not evident.

This intelligence is functional to deal with simple problems that can be managed with univocal cause-effect actions. It is based on following a theory-practice model that is necessary to apply analytical methods.

Therefore, it works with the existing knowledge of a group and is valid when the analytical knowledge is functional. It manages the root causes based on their theoretical validity.

The interpersonal exchange is based on the discussion of the theoretical foundations of the problem and the analysis of the problem when the environment is uncertain.

Constructive Intelligence

Constructive intelligence uses a constructivist approach based on the knowledge of the concepts and fundamentals of a complex problem that is being solved.

It is based on a solution-thinking approach that uses conceptual benchmarks based on analogical or homological experience to find secure precedents of solutions.

It uses a conceptual approach to define the category of a problem, to diagnose the possible solutions, and also uses a systemic approach to build the solutions.

The interpersonal exchange is based on the discussions of the root causes of the problems and the development of pilot tests when the environment is uncertain.

Synergic Intelligence

The synergic intelligence approaches complex adaptive environments based on managing the ontogenetic maps of the problems and their wide and restricted contexts that influence their functionality.

This collective intelligence is based on a solution-thinking approach that uses a reflection-driven approach based on experiencing the possible solutions using destructive pilot tests to find the limits of their functionality, and non-destructive tests to confirm their efficiency and efficacy.

It is based on fundamentals-based diagnoses integrated with technical diagnoses to confirm the functionality of the problems and their solution.

The interpersonal exchange is based on sharing the functional design of the solutions and the development of unicist reflection processes on the destructive and non-destructive tests.

Functional Design and Collective Intelligence

The members of the unicist functional design groups that participate in the development of solutions need to build the necessary collective intelligence that allows accessing the unicist ontology of adaptive systems and environments to define their concepts and fundamentals, which are the root causes of their functionality, dynamics, and evolution.

Collective intelligence increases the efficacy of the members of the group. The building of collective intelligence is based on solving problems in adaptive environments.  The enhancement of collective intelligence became possible due to the use of the Unicist Reflection method and the Unicist Q method.

While collective intelligence saves 2/3 of the time needed to develop adaptive solutions in existing organizations, it is unnecessary in non-adaptive organizations.

The framework of conscious collective intelligence building

On the one hand, the reflection method is based on exposing the dysfunctionality of one’s opinions based on the acceptance that functionality prevails over personal beliefs. It is based on seeing the light in the shadow and not only the shadow in the light. It requires being able to face the “no” without needing to confront.

On the other hand, the Q method empowers intelligence by integrating incompatibilities. It drives to a superior level of intelligence by driving toward superior ethical intelligence, which generates the complementation of thinking processes. The integration of both methods provides the structure of collective intelligence when there is a real need to add value to the environment.

Unicist Groups Enhance Collective Intelligence

All the unicist groups that deal with the development of solutions in an adaptive environment have the same structure to enhance their collective intelligence. They have a coordinator, a fallacy-shooter, and an ombudsperson.

The complementation and supplementation of these roles enhance the collective intelligence of groups. It expands the efficacy of the participants by introducing the core aspects of the functionality of a group.

Collective intelligence is enhanced by the organization of roles in groups that drive the discussion of problems based on the functionality of the solutions. These roles generate two basic effects:

  1. They ensure the need of agreement on the functionality of the solutions that are developed.
  2. They integrate the triadic structure of adaptive solution building:
    a) The problem-solving assurance
    b) The solution-building process
    c) The quality-assurance of the process

The purpose of the group is monitored by the ombudsperson, the actions are managed by the coordinator and the fallacy shooter is responsible for ensuring the validity of the knowledge and the development of destructive and non-destructive pilot tests of the solutions. This process occurs in the context of use of functional knowledge of the processes and the use of functional designers.

After a group has been organized it is necessary to ensure the rotation of these roles to avoid that their actions become subjectivized.

Framework of unicist design groups
  1. The “Ombudsperson” is responsible for monitoring the value generation of the design processes.

The “Ombudsperson” is responsible for monitoring that the proposals respond to the functional needs of the solutions that are required; s/he guarantees results. The ombudsperson represents the “user” and is responsible for generating value to the environment.

  1. The “Coordinator” is responsible for guiding the group towards the objectives that have been defined.

The coordinator has full responsibility for the diagnoses and for achieving the results that have been defined as being possible to be achieved. The participants also have full responsibility for the results after they agree that such results are possible.

  1. The “Fallacy-Shooter” is responsible for assuring the quality of the foundations and justifications in the decision-making processes.

The “Fallacy-Shooter” is the person responsible for guiding the pilot tests based on an action-reflection-action process to improve the accuracy of the diagnoses and of the work processes.


The collective intelligence of people and organizations simplifies the approach to the functionality of adaptive systems accelerating the development of structural solutions.