Innovation resistance


Teaching vs. Learning: the use of Unicist Learning Objects

Teaching is the cost of education and learning is the generated value. The use of unicist learning objects diminishes the cost and increases the value of what is being learned. A positive side effect is that learners assume the responsibility to adapt to the environment and not only to the teacher.

Learning ObjectsThe purpose of a learning object is to install an adaptive knowledge object in the mind of the learner. Learning objects build a bridge and integrate theory with practice that allow individuals to use them and recycle them if necessary.

This implies that the learning objects drive the accommodation process to accept new aspects that were not managed before and integrate these new aspects in mind through an assimilation process which requires storing this integration in the long term memory of individuals.

Learning objects are complex adaptive systems that have been designed to drive the learning processes of the learner without needing external support when working within functional learning environments.

A functional learning environment exists when there is a need of a specific knowledge to do something, the necessary capacities of an individual are available and accessible and the objects have the necessary authoritative role to be accepted.

Learning objects cannot work when these conditions are exceeded and then the participation of a counselor becomes necessary to substitute these objects by personal action. This is homologous to the autopilot of an airplane which needs to be substituted by the pilot when the conditions of the external environment exceed the possibilities of the object.

Diana Belohlavek

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute was the pioneer in complexity science research and became a private global decentralized world-class research organization in the field of human adaptive systems.
http://www.unicist.org


Energy Saving in Business Management

Work implies producing a displacement of something in the real world. Every displacement generates a friction that needs to be managed.

When two people are doing something in a working environment and one of them produces work and the other is inactive, the friction produced is extremely destructive.

It produces a paradoxical situation because:

1) There is an extreme conflict if the friction is not eliminated.
2) If the parts are “lubricated”, there will be no friction but the person who is inactive will continue doing nothing.
3) The inactive person needs to judge what the other part is doing because that judgment sustains her/his self-esteem.
4) Finally, the one who does the work ends up being judged by the one who cannot do it and the conflict escalates to the maximal level.

Apparent movement is worse than inaction

Inaction appears often hidden behind apparent actions that are done without having assumed the responsibility for producing results. These apparent actions are based on fallacious decisions that produce negative results because they generate costs without adding value.

In this case they do not produce friction; they directly produce an “explosion” of the situation or an “implosion” of the actions.

If this conflict is not faced the natural trend towards minimum energy consumption (*) and inaction will prevail, eliminating both apparent actions and real actions.

To deal with this problem the nature of doers has to be understood in order to avoid their quitting. Access a free e-book on the Nature of Doers http://unicist.org/deb_doers.php

(*) In a closed system, with constant external parameters and entropy, the internal energy will decrease and approach a minimum value at equilibrium.

Access a Free Trial of the unicist standard contained in the Unicist Standard Search Engine: http://www.unicist.com/

Request more information: n.i.brown@unicist.org

Peter Belohlavek

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute is the major research organization in the world in its specialty based on more than 3,000 researches in complexity science applied to individual, institutional and social evolution. The applicative researches are based on the discovery of the Ontogenetic Intelligence of Nature and the consequent Unicist Theory of Evolution.

Access a Free Trial:

If you would like to receive monthly information on this blog, please register here.

Follow us on twitter


Benchmarking General Electric: The Nature of Innovation

Managing the nature of innovation is basic when dealing with growth. This is something General Electric manages since the era of Thomas Edison.

The Unicist Standard in Innovation Management deals with the object driven technologies that are necessary to manage innovations.

You will find the information on the nature of innovation between the lines of Jeff Immelt’s lecture, CEO of G.E:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YOEwYAXH10

Next week we will be providing the ontology of innovation in order to help benchmark General Electric.

Request more information: n.i.brown@unicist.org

Diana Belohlavek
VP Unicist Knowledge Bank

NOTE: The Unicist Research Institute is the major research organization in the world in its specialty based on more than 3,000 researches in complexity sciences applied to individual, institutional and social


The unicist ontology of Innovation Blindness: The Talent killer

The development of unicist technologies and their implementation processes required the research of innovation blindness to develop strategies to avoid it.

Change blindness is a well known and experimented subject. The research was developed by different educational institutions: http://viscog.beckman.uiuc.edu/change/people.shtml

Innovation blindness is an unconscious response of individuals who do not perceive the proposed change, when the conditions to make use of it are not given.

The avoidance of energy consumption to introduce a new task in an individual’s brain is the functionality of innovation blindness.

Causes of innovation blindness

There are social and individual causes.

Social causes

1) When there are utopias implicit in the innovations that are out of reach for a group or society.
2) When the innovation does not respects the myths of a culture.
3) When the innovation disrespects the taboos of a culture.
4) When the innovation modifies the ethics of a culture.

Individual causes

1) When it modifies an individual’s habits.
2) When it modifies the ethics of an individual.
3) When the “functional recreation” by a user requires a level of knowledge the individual doesn’t have.
4) When the ego or the “business” of an individual is affected.
5) When an increase of responsibility of the user is required and s/he has no need to assume it.
6) When an increase of internal freedom of the individual is required.
7) When it stimulates guild or fear of the user.

You can find information on Innovation Blindness  in the Unicist Business Search Engine: http://www.unicist.com

Request more information: n.i.brown@unicist.org

Your comments are welcome.

Diego  Belohlavek
Expert System Manager

To translate this post, click on the title to open it and then click on your flag in the right menu.

If you would like to receive monthly information on new scientific developments, please register here.

Use it now!!!

Unicist Business Search Engine