Thursday, December 20, 2018

it is all about viewpoints!


Regarding viewpoints, it is a matter of definition of "completeness". In a world without any constraints we should aim for 110% completeness and have representation and surrogacy for all possible views... BUT we have to choose because we do have to deal with a rather large set of constraints, both project constraints (time, money and resources...) as well as legal stuff and "demanded requirements" etc ...

So we need a "scientific" way to prioritize and limit the viewpoints ... it is NOT easy!

This stakeholder managment skills (often uphold, explored and developed by a Business Analyst) involves soo much more than just a list of names and a communication strategy!

An "agile list of names" is NOT good enough...

Exploring, provoking, trawl and strategically "manipulating" to bring forward "that which can not be easily said or answered in a meeting" is a real skill that is not only about iterations. Iterations are only as strong as their inherent tranformational function!

We never see what is out there, we only see a representation of what we know, and that is a bottleneck for creativity and real change ...

Wednesday, November 21, 2018

Draw the f..g map!

Draw the f..g map! 
...that is my personal mantra for basically everything and anything...

If it is complex, it is complex! 

If you have more than 3 entities, grab a pen a draw it on the wall ..and you will definitely experience that TALK is not enough!! If you aspire to be "truly agile", you have to visualize it ALL!... to be smart you have to navigate ...to navigate you need a map ... don't be stupid!

"only talk" is just rubbish! ...instead, TALK about the map! 

Real understanding comes from visual knowledge representation and involvement and talking about the created maps (or diagrams forming the model)...

Wednesday, November 14, 2018

Visual thinking & understanding in BA / RE / ARCH practices used in industry product development

Tacit knowledge calibration

The concept of visual management and visual feedback is one of the pillars in Lean Product development for communication of status, progress, prognosis, and planning, e.g. tracking of work identified, ongoing and done in the development teams via kanban-like boards as well as the progress according to existing plan, expectations and what is actually delivered. 

The leaders of the development teams are more interested in the use of resources and the amount of work to be done, so future work can be planned accordingly. 
The downstream stakeholders like sales, manufacturing, marketing etc.. also need to SEE how the projects are doing so they can plan and be ready at the right time.

The knowledge needed and the representations used, are pragmatic and efficient for management and planning, and the focus is NOT on the visual thinking and understanding of what shall be done. 
Only the management and control aspects of the development are considered.

In the BA/RE practice you often get advice to use X or Y or Z but no direction on WHICH representation to use and no focus on reasoning regarding the effect on this choice for downstream development.
The often individual decisions are suspiciously sub-optimal with no supporting knowledge of consequence of the specific Knowledge Representational choice as it will most likely affect the way we see things, think and are able to invent …but most importantly the ignorance of what we do NOT see and what has been lost in the knowledge transformation along the way ---"the Software Engineering Chinese whispers game"(" Telephone-, Gossip game", "viskleken") aka "the agile guessing game"…
"Chinese whispers game"

The essence of the game is that "Whispered messages" are passed around the room and the version which comes back to the starting point bare no relation to the original message. This phenomenon of "whispering" can also be extended to "not really understanding" in a more general sense to describe every day "mis-telling" of stories and misunderstanding of knowledge in any setting or form, when only using talk and sloppy writing are used as for knowledge communication. In fact, the sheer existence of this "whispering effect" is one of the reasons why LEAN and AGILE will never really work in Software Engineering without a sincere and focused knowledge representation for thinking and understanding!

We are lacking a focus on HOW we make the decision between different Visual Knowledge representations and the effect of our choices both at the same level regarding knowledge, understanding, innovation, and creativity, but also the downstream understanding of WHAT is communicated and what is NOT represented at all. 

Most models are not explicitly showing the Visual Knowledge Representation, but can easily be enhanced by a VKR component. For example the VKR decision point in the MSDDRE model
The MSDDRE model developed by Krzysztof Wnuk 
Blekinge Tekniska Högskola (modified by the author)


And by the way, this is my research domain. Do you want a draft title?
OK here we go:


“Formal & informal Visual Knowledge Representation used for knowledge transfer 
in Requirements Engineering, Business Analysis and Software Architecture
- evaluation of real usage in industry, choice of representation and diagram narratives to identify difficulties and errors in thinking and how to find the Best Possible, Good-enough and Visual Knowledge Representation with focus on the properties required for formal modeling in practice"

Friday, August 17, 2018

Another example on the benefits of real RE and BA thinking!


read the short article : https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN1L11NN

The key to making this happen is of course the real understanding of the PARTS and components and the variability and possibilities combined with a "razor-sharp understanding" of the stakeholders and the real needs ...

"With the car retailing for 12,000 euros, pre-existing components keeps costs down. The engine, for example, is a modified version of a fork-lift powerplant, and the door handles come from the Fiat 500"

... "the instrumentation is bare bones. We have stripped a lot of the needless instruments out, said Oliver. "In modern cars you have so many buttons I honestly don't know what many of them are for."


It is very simple...if you do not know which knowledge you need to have and do not represent it in a way that "communicates", you are just guessing in the dark ...

Start with some good thinking and then some spicy "passion" and it becomes a great product! ...

RE = Requirements Engineering, BA = Business Analysis


Wednesday, June 27, 2018

”nudging” adjektiv i texter

Jag gillar INTE när journalister strör ”nudging-adjektiv" i sina texter OAVSETT vad det handlar om 

jämför :

”Hans hårda retorik är ett exempel på hur Lega, som tillsammans med Femstjärnerörelsen nu styr Italien”

med 

”Hans hårda retorik är ett exempel på hur främlingsfientliga Lega, som tillsammans med populistiska Femstjärnerörelsen nu styr Italien”

eller

”Hans hårda retorik är ett exempel på hur främlingsfientliga Lega, som tillsammans med populistiska Femstjärnerörelsen nu styr Italien”

... den senare med författarens val av adjektiv väl synliga i rött.

Detta sätt att skriva är extremt vanligt i svensk press .

Adjektiven är direkt kopplade till journalistens personliga värderingar om respektive objekt och är till för att styra läsarens semantiska process för tolkning av texten.

Jag läser hellre ”rena texter” och faktabaserade kommentarer istället för journalistens ”adjektiv-strösslade nudge-nudge”

Det betyder inte att jag inte tror at Lega är "främlingsfientligt", men vill hellre se en faktaruta om Lega och en statistik kring de som röstar på Lega. Detsamma gäller med adjektiv kring alla vår riksdagspartier. Att knyta ihop partinamnet med ett adjektiv är ett sätt att ljuga. Att slippa resonera kring hur man kom fram till epitetet och att visa med fakta att det faktiskt stämmer eller ej.

Inom kravingenjörskap (Requirements Engineering) så är alla attribut kopplade till någon typ av skala med en enhet och är således mätbara. Faktum är att VARJE parti kan vara "populistiskt" inom ett specifiikt område till en mer eller mindre stor grad på en given skala baserat på fakta och relevanta undersökningar. Att använda ett adjektiv i informativa texter precis som om det var ett faktum utan gradering eller att använda adjektivet som om det vore en del av själva "varumärket", är i min värld detsamma som att generalisera utan att känna till (eller vilja kännas vid) de underliggande strukturerna ...dvs helt enkelt STUPID .. se bilden nedan!




Friday, May 18, 2018

FlyingBrainBlogg#8 - Vill du lära dig åka MonoSki?


nja ...kanske inte ...men HUR man lär sig saker påverkas definitivt av vårt sätt att TÄNKA kring själva inlärning. Nedan följer en sida ur min booklet vid namnet "Introduction to MonoSki Carving" skriven på engelska för all världens passionerade MonoSki-riders... det är bara att byta ut MonoSki till den sport eller den utmaning då står inför eller har, så hoppas jag att jag kan påverka din mentala bild (se även Post-it Thinking! -link )

senaste versionen av "Introduction to MonoSki Carving" hittar du här 

... så nu switchar jag till engelska :-)

---


Next chapter in the intro to monoski carving will be about "freedom" and
"esprit de glisse
the mindset and state of mind and learning level when no rules are applied (or rather : all principles are internalized and "forgotten" and have become habits)
...so that you are 110% monoski-ZEN and do not need to think at all! 

If you have not seen MonoSki in action
check out this short clip:

How to Monoski with 110% feeling!
Theory and reality are two very different things for sure, but if you come to a pool table without any knowledge of “tips & trix” and best practices and with no plan for the shot, you will have a much harder time to become a really good pool player. It is not 10 000 hours of practice that will make you great, it is the PERFECT practice in which you constantly challenge yourself and your assumptions, learn and 
re-learn, that will lead to mastery. A lot of research shows that the way you THINK about learning is VERY important for the end result…so let us look at the 4 stages of learning for monoski.

It is not 10 000 hours of practice that will make you great,
it is the
PERFECT practice in which you constantly challenge yourself
and your assumptions, learn and re-learn, that will lead to mastery


The 4 stages of learning for monoski.

There are no RULES in monoski!

But at the same time there are some basic principles that if you do not understand them or work against them, you will have a hard time progressing to mastery.

In the learning model we distinguish
competence, when you can do something, and incompetence, when you can not. Then this knowledge is either conscious (you are well aware of what you know and do not know) or subconscious (like “under the surface”, you have already learnt it, but forgot that you actually had to learn it) or unconscious, which basically means that you are unaware of not knowing. 

When you arrive at 110% feeling you are in the quadrant subconscious - competence: ”you can monoski without thinking and can enjoy every sense in the situation, you are relaxed and your breathing is natural and the brain is ”empty” and your whole body is in ”flow”. This is the state of ”esprit de glisse”! You are one with the snow, the ski and the gravitational pull and you are not ”fighting the ski” but riding along in perfect harmony with the elements and the tools.
Have I ever been there? Probably not, as I am thinking too much and because I spend a lot of time trying to understand things in my profession, I have a hard time letting go. But my goal is to forget everything and let the muscle memory be my only guide.


The interesting thing happens when you have experienced (or you are very close to) mastery in a specific situation with a specific set of tools. For example, you are sooo good in powder on your pintail that you have used soo many hours since 1983. Then you buy a carving monoski and start to use it in the pist. Per definition the change is so big that you have to get back to ”the drawing board”, re-learn the parts, the new set of tips & trix, the new behaviour and tap into the ”soul” of the new ski. You basically have to be humble enough to be in the state ”Conscious - Incompetence”, trying out new techniques and testing the limits of the new environment and tools. Then you have to focus on the new details and practice a new behaviour so it becomes second nature and a new habit, reprogramming the muscles to NOT use pintail behaviour when riding a carving ski.


1: the re-learn from Mastery (Subconscious-Competence) to “beginner”  (Conscious-Incompetence)
2: the understanding of new concepts to starting to control them more and mor in practice
3: finding that the practice is not optimal – go back to “the parts” and re-think!
4: the perfect practice leads to mastery …again!

Being a true master is also to be able to have a ”beginners mind” to see things with new eyes, to re-learn and to practice again like being a ”beginner”. Of course this can take less than an hour if you are a real master. Sadly some people who are masters in one specific domain do not want to re-learn and rather continue with old habits on new and in different situations or avoid the new situations all together. A master in pist carving can be like a beginner in off-pist powder, and vice versa.
It is not that one is better than the other, it is just different domains!
In a way the ”Master Master” could be defined as a master that has re-educated and re-learnt every new situation and tool and can adapt to all changes in an instant without thinking.

Another situation that is very common for quality athletes and riders is change after an accident.If you brake a leg and go through rehab and have to get back on track and maybe adjust to a "new body" ...your "curious mind" has to figure it out all over again (yes..it is faster this time than the first round of learning ...but NOT re-learning when the context is changing is ...."stupid" ... or nicer said: "not optimal") 







and a longer MonoSki clip with my MonoSki friends


Monday, February 26, 2018

FlyingBrainBlogg#7 - Kvoteringstänkets tankevurpor


”Antalet nominerade kvinnor till Oscarsgalan är inte mer än 23%” ….

Hur kan det komma sig att smarta människor plockar fram dessa siffror eller lyssnar till dem utan att reflektera? Vad betyder egentligen 23%
Jag kan inte fatta hur man kan blanda ihop korten så pass att man fastnar vid en siffra utan att ifrågasätta vilket underlag som procenten beräknas på!
Om vi tittar på filmer som släpptes under 2017/2018 och således nomineringsbar till en OSCAR, exempelvis the Square eller The Shape of water, hur många kvinnor finns med i rollerna i dessa filmer ?
Problemet med denna ”politiskt korrekta fokusering på %” leder till att rätt frågor inte ställs överhuvudtaget. 
Frågor bör riktas mot urvalet. Varför är det så få kvinnor som skrivs in i manus och utkast till berättelser. Hur många registrerade skådespelare av respektive kön finns det att välja på egentligen?
Vad beror det på att det ser ut som det gör? Hur kan vi ”nudga” systemet så att urvalet och intresset från kvinnor ökar, så att det blir ett mer jämnt fördelat antal roller. Först då kan ”den yttre procenten” öka på ett naturligt sätt som inte handlar om kvotering eller ytliga nomineringar.

Jag brukar ta exemplet om bilverkstäder.
Hur många kvinnor äger eller jobbar i en bilverkstad? Om det finns en styrelse som representerar alla bilverkstäder i hela Sverige, hur kan man påstå eller driva på för att 50% i styrelsen ska vara kvinnor? Procenten i styrelsen ska matcha det som underlaget bär fram. Styrelsen förbannade uppgift är att förstå VARFÖR det ser ut som det gör och skapa förklaringsmodeller kring hur bilverkstäder startas eller hur bilmekaniker rekryteras, hur gymnasieutbildningarna gör reklam för yrket och förstå drivkrafterna för unga kvinnor i relation till yrket. DÅ gör man riktig nytta för jämnställdhet och likabehandling. Att ge ALLA samma chans och ta bort alla hinder som medvetet eller omedvetet stoppar olika grupper (det behöver inte enbart vara separationen mellan kön, utan även nationalitet eller ålder etc…kan vara lika intressant att adressera!) 


Att se till att ha 50% kvinnor i en styrelse utan att förstå bakomliggande orsaker, drivkrafter och utan en väl utarbetade och genomgången logisk konsekvensmodell, det är inte jämlikhet, det är STUPID!

Att kvotera in personer på minoritetsfaktorer och att inte fokusera på kompetens är skadligt för helheten och kommer slå tillbaka och motverka all typ av optimering.



jpg: