Monthly Archives: April 2009

“Objects” make research safer

To translate this post click on your flag in the right menu of the blog’s homepage.

“Objects” technology is an upgrade in the world of research. It implies that one can establish which parts of the research and past research can be used again.
In reality, all research has a goal of discovering causal relationships at some time, but above all it seeks to build sound knowledge that can be accepted and used by all.
The organization of research projects by objects enables – departing and “arriving” at sound knowledge – a significant reduction in the cost of the projects, as well as a higher fulfillment rate of the plans made.
The first thing we should do is define what an object is from a conceptual point of view. An object is an entity that has an implied, extrinsic concept that adds value to a process and with quality assurance interwoven with the object itself.
This definition is ambiguous and complex to understand without an example to explain it.
We can state that a research protocol is an object whose concept is defined by that which is to be researched, to the extent that the steps and instructions listed in the protocol enable the posed hypotheses to be confirmed or rejected.
We can state then that the “protocol” object has added value.
Finally, the implementation of the research protocol, that is, carry out the clinical research from an operational/experimental point of view, is that which confirms or rejects the hypotheses originally posed.

Every correctly designed protocol meets these criteria.

The research protocol is a clear example of how clinical research has been working by objects for many years.
Today, clinical research trials have multiplied and are increasingly global. This fact makes their planning and achievement enormously difficult.
Organizing by objectives enables the reliability of the prognoses to be increased and work to be much more efficient and this is essential, say, in the case of a Project Leader who sitting at his desk in Boston has to manage a clinical trial with thousands of patients and hundreds of research centers from Buenos Aires to Tokyo.
One of the ways of transforming organizational processes into objects is to attempt to identify their decisive aspects.
Each time that a process is being transformed into an object a reduction in costs will have resulted and one will be working in a much safer and precise way.
Organizing a research trial by objects implies thinking from the end to the beginning because otherwise one would be organizing by work processes. This requires a precise definition of the purpose of the object so as to be able to transform the work processes into objects as far as possible.
To understand this subject a little better it is worth while mentioning an example.
When one works by processes, the choice of a research center implies:
1) Identify the suitable center to carry out the trial.
2) Carry out the assessment visit.
3) Decide the acceptance of the center on the basis of the results of the visit.

But what happens when this process becomes the object?

One defines first what is expected from the research center. If we state that a research center must be reliable, on the basis of this definition the criteria are established that define that a center be so.
If the criteria chosen enable a reliable center to be selected, then we can state that the object, the “selection of a reliable center,” has added value.
Finally, one has to be sure that the correct center is being chosen. Therefore, it is essential to have a system to double check the center’s information that was collected during the assessment visit, as a way of ensuring the reliability of said information.
Therefore, what was originally a selection process is now a research center selection system that does not depend on any particular individual and where the decision to qualify a center is carried out by a system. This increases significantly the objectivity and precision of the selection of the center. It also implies a significant reduction in costs, above all because of the savings in time and resources used in the decision making.
Examples of organization by objects can also be found in the software industry, construction and food processing, among others. Of course, it is hoped that clinical research will adopt them definitely.
The aim of carrying out research by objects is to develop parts of the research as safe and reusable cognitive structures
This is an upgrade for cottage industry-based research.

D. Glancszpigel

Hippocrates for all…

“I swear by Apollo the physician and Aesculapius, and Hygieia and Panaceia, and all the gods and goddesses, that, according to my ability and judgement, I will keep this Oath and this stipulation– to reckon him who taught me this Art equally dear to me as my parents, to share my substance with him, and relieve his necessities if required; to look upon his off-spring in the same footing as my own brothers, and to teach them this art, if they shall wish to learn it, without fee or stipulation; and that by precept, lecture, and every other mode of instruction, I will impart a knowledge of the Art to my own sons, and those of my teachers, and to disciples bound by a stipulation and oath according to the law of medicine, but to none others…..”

Access more information at:

If you would like to get acquainted with unicist technologies, you can request an invitation as a Guest Participant in a module of Unicist Strategy.