main index

P00: frame around

P01: olicognography

P04: popular economics

wayout:contact

User

You?
Use?
Perspective?
Usage?
Concern

Graph Start

Core n
Half complex graph

OLICOGNOGRAPHY on DEMOCRATIC ECONOMY

System

Engineering

Development

Scale

Health

Social

Complex Programming

Basic Olicognograph: Production Cycle

Complex Core where Decision

"General government service delivery is characterised by a number of factors that present challenges to the objective of achieving value for money. These include:

  • Complexities of the political process,
  • Tensions between short term imperatives and the design of long term program and service delivery strategies,
  • Uncertainties about the most appropriate delivery strategies,
  • Unequal information among stakeholders pertaining to community needs, as well as program and service possibilities,
  • Different incentives for different stakeholders,
  • Absence of price signals to guide decisions on service provision and consumption, and
  • Lack of competition in service provision".

But all does not disqualify the "provider(s)" of:

  • Chief judge of regulation between democratics and doing it, as the the will for Liberty (or the essence of freedoms),
  • Institutions to respect as the "worldppossibewide temples of mutual respect of human beings, and of groups of believes with good effects of relationships,
  • The spiritedl unphysical chief of state of justice, applying to anyone with the least harm possible,
  • The tools of the resources when the resources have offer positive possibilities to the all, but the aim to self-maintain the hegemony of the all power at any cost, since non human have the overpower of wisdom,
  • The warrant of access for everyones' society into common responsabilities, according its social potential, with an open mind on potential of transitions into higher Value (and care for diversity of positive values),
  • Chief regulator over mad lovers of individual benefit speculators especially those managing unanchored information having big lies about strong use of fake money or hard ways with mechanisms of virtual maximization, and so on.

When considering the levels of decision, or more precisely the levels of implication, it is necessary to separate things that have just local and/or particular effects from those concerning a more extended overdispersed community, so where global solutions can find their way ignoring much of enacting empathy. These differences between particular processes and global ones also imply different methods of organization and different technical processes of information to add to those already existing. Feasibility does not resolve just eliminating concepts but only narrowing the cover of the conceptual universe of lawful matrix. This does not mean that there could be more truth or fallacies in or out of a practical matrix or implicit of a larger one than about the system. It is a matter of perspective, if you are in or out the matrix, the table, the system or the circle. If "in" the system of benefits, does not exclude any concept democratically suggested, before having examined what can be made, equilibrating all the matrice(s). Out, you may still define yourself respect to the matrix, incorporate something in it and/or become part of a deal or, if wanting to stay out still with superior rights and duties: the transcendental axis of the matrix.

You should never miss that in socio-technical systems there is not much in books, meanwhile plenty of consistent information playing. Most information should be about reality and good minds good wills should be careful If you know how to see, analyze, think and adapt ideas and concepts simply and flexibly, you can be successful. More generally, it is very interesting at each step of such analytic and practical process to provide time periods, assess your relations in such a way to identify needs for policies and links to expand. For cash and cost information, it is to review this whole along cycles of production (as with cash flow). Imagine that good citizens can design their productive perspective and situations an after, communicate in an fair way. This basic information structured, with a proper statistical collection and treatment, eventually visual (if you do not complicate it too much and easy it with colors, graphs, and writings), can be very useful to honnest social programers. Much is still to be done to identify sustainable profiles of production. This can help conjuncturing.

Complex Decision Processes

If you consider a large scale project, most elements given in an olicognograph, logically require complex formal precision. The studies and supports elaborated for that, meet difficulties for being understood by common citizens. Projects of this sort can have huge social implications and have to develop theoretical, complex methodological perspective(s). In the past, large projects have often been implemented with brutal means. So under the arcana of technical procedures, it was hard to follow the trails of decisions' design but at end the applications and most of expenditures and defect for the people . On the other side, these trails also have revealed very sensitive to nondemocratic manipulations.

Technocratic process, formally properly democratic, sometimes try to cover political legitimacy: democratic participation. For many years (at least during the seventies and eighties of the twentieth century), this sort of process have considered large infrastructure projects, involving simultaneously many communities, like in large publicworks (airport, large dams, highways). Ideally, a perfect process contemplates the realization of all activities ordered according well sophisticated computed programs (originally PERT or GANTT ones). So the difficulties turned to the management of all terms, and the hard way that can preserve the essence of democracy and political legitimacy. But, economically, most methods (and still many) were trying to converge, theoretically, to a unique and simple last decision (often the begining of ends). Such processes often have to concentrate on too few nodes and steps of decisions and this exposes the project and citizenship to manipulations of bad governance. Especially when the oligarchic duo of technocrats and plutocrat(s) is in charge. Of course a dogmatic olicognograhy, may be also of an esoteric sort, would be well prone to that, since there is in that efficiency.

Difficulties also rise from necessary integrations and even from some otherwise useful confusions. Processes almost never come alone neither are just like details of social life. Effects have to be integrated in a wider complex relativity. Anthropic transformations may imply to withdraw the previous ways of life of affected people, to which they were adapted and sustainably efficient with. So to design 'new ways of life' not necessarilly all with the same qualities. Examples are large dams and other same sort of projects, where social issues have been seen in a very simplistic way. And it often happens to that those projects did not even produced expected benefits.

Ideal sequences of assessment are hard and best decisions can soon turn “wrong”. Somehow they must, at the end of the process, if they have solved the problem; more commonly they do not they just move it. So, if in large public works projects you imagine reserving a final decision without previously informing, preparing, finding options, etc. you will almost always fail. If those processes are too formal, they will stay virtual misguiding exercises. All the confusion and complexity that can exist in large projects, more easily managed when all parts understand each other in the operative plan and share technical individual and social responsibilities. That is, when all people involved are a bit at the same time technician, citizen and politician, liable and concerned about the project, with the values of an open society. This requires respect (empathic and at human distance), to share abridged understanding of operative behaviors as a micro-social expression of self-paradigm. Also to be allowed to take any possibility to help, prevent and conduct all what can make a successfull project.

That does not necessarily disqualify any general process. But to everyone, it has to be clear that you are seeking a social policy to enforce a social sense of unity and solidarity, where you do not pretend to be too determinist, with objectives like utopic claims or too ambitious material results. Especially with the ones whom have a precarious family economy if any family at all. Since you cannot ensure for sure your policies be better for them, nor without critical definitive effects. With this in mind, large scale projects are justified if there are also instruments and mechanisms of projection and able to manage good transfers to most vulnerable people or at least not too adverse to their precarious conditions. Consider that at human distance any individual must feel free to cooperate.

Scale transformations

For a community assessment of a large scale complex project, you will need to be more flexible, less directive, have more scale inputs and more intensity in trainings and learnings of democratic efficiency. We often observed that an important problem of development has to do with the difficulty to change the scales of actions. Many can do well with small budgets (plenty do not) but many can be very ineffective when budgets or means grow significantly. Sometimes, because of their lack of training or experience but also because they intend to transpose simple procedures at higher levels of scale without caring the difference. Quite commonly important people, with important resources prefer to use society to make their own work, rather than assume properly their status, in terms of responsibility and for understanding how to obtain democratically. So they are very keen to pretend that nothing more than the enunciates of their good rules and financial management really work. Without value prejudging on needs of financial leadership. Even a highly pyrramidal and strong enterprise needs delegation and trust. This allows more extension of simple operations, but at the expense of complexity, this has its social as well as technical merits.

How to organize transparent and collaborative processes of information and decision in common citizen’s labor when pretending to be higher levels of intervention ? Such processes include making things explicit in a way that allows everyone to imagine, do, classify, verify and respect the will and wish of citizens and commitment of those in charge. The aim is to go faster in more essential things and operations. Notice that in many social organizations, a great amount of time is wasted discussing on organization’s methodology or trying to fix, too theoretically high ideas that will often be revealed wrong after plenty of waste. Our point is to make a difference between founding principles and tactics that emerge from situations; not so theoretical and contexts' cogitations that can make useless theories or serve purpose to avoid comparisons or disqualify any efforts at the respect. Whatever the disposition of professionals and resources and even with supposed perfect leaders or miserable excellently lauded managers; complete exact processes do not exist.

It is, of course, necessary to build ideas, concepts, and strategic actions; specify them. But definitions far from situations are abstract (black or white boxes). So, if you are far from reality or pretend to have solved complexity, be careful not to inflate the perfect details of your definitions, especially if intermediate social structures or unfair process of governance exist and can put it all down. Of course, it is necessary to assess but even more to prepare oneself for future difficulties that can eventually, but not necessarily, be revealed (emerged) during the activities. In fact, these trainings have to do with the approximations of procedures of answers and develop flexible skills. Decisions must consider levels of consistency and information. We define information as some map of all minimum figured elements necessary to resolve a problem, in our case, emerging within a community. Transparency is required in social practices, but it can be very complicated to implement or can affect the rights of community. So, the sort of transparency that is required is the sort of synthesis what practically helps in a reliable way to approach and manage issues close to their social utilities.

The social process of decision is not always clear and simple. In very structured organizations, such as corporations things are organized to make simple decisions strong, and complexity is encapsulated in the simplifications of the structure to seem to stay manageable (technologies can go up). But nodes of command include also implicit technical skills. In more democratic social constructions, this is not so as simple as it looks like in businesses. There the prospects of information can be not socially apparent or informal, like when consulting counselors or representatives, delegating priorities to same profiles: "clones of leadership", to force complex but mastered solutions to be accepted and strengthen liable commitments. But even top managers of private enterprises are not free to do whatever they want and will not be followed solely because of their technical skills. Information processings can be different, not only for the final decision and authority of the manager. Social administration information ought to be based on rules of decision, quite different from crude rude economics sectors. They must obey democracy in essence and are supposed to support the best decisions for a social future. Practically we are far from virtue.

Within community, whatever the matter, social implication must imply modest conception, participation in the information processes; even if it’s explicit and implicit organization is delicate and very cultural. In a community, we consider that a decision should reflect better democracy. Now, mechanisms of democracy need to be more effective and more efficient in the building of social sense of utilities. Adverse configurations as clans, ill-intentioned clubs are too frequent. Good social consults or audits should be organized and/or the decisions have to be made by some sort of accepted legitimacy as elected representatives. Do not imagine that democracy is just one very isolated formal procedure and nothing more.

Economies of scale and higher technical goals can justify firms' pyramidal structure, and anyone should find intellectual satisfaction and material reward in working under others. But you have also to be complete, seek the commitment of citizens and design what will make you sincere and efficient, not just stay a fake "superior blessed" one. A vertical system of relationships is not enough: structures or institutions are far from effectively promoting sincerity and efficiency. Organization of the economy cycles, periods, and rhythms of production is essential to entreprise management of time. Many sophisticated methods already exist. So pay attention to existing ones. They are a good source of inspiration. The importance of time’s organization is illustrated by different perspectives of time I gave some before.

Social Decision Processes

Social programs often show deficiencies in the practical applications of these essential dimensions (plural complex things). For example, times' constraints links across social and technical divisions of society; and these complicated processes that require schedules and rhythms can be un-democratically and non technically driven. So not according a dynamic of resolution of complex social goals; and stopped by the difficulties of predetermined issues or different goals politically decided.

To observe that good human distance (proximal), makes useful variety of exercises to show the relationships between all parts andtime constraints connections, less rigidly specified than in traditional economy as input-output linear models. A problem with social creativity is that improvisation is limited by rigidity of minds, undemocratic and unrealistic practices, serving technocratic and bureaucratic purposes. Because effective management in community development is weak and mostly equipped with tools derived from traditional organization, this favors passive assistance and hypocrisy: democratic in the appearance unsustainable abusing under the sleeve (bogus inside). That is: you should agree with what proposed and shut up about anything as phenomenologically evident: the right of the money stay with me, value as I like..

You may follow steps similar to those of a meeting or an assembly:

  1. Convocation, setting the relevancy of it (moment, people, place),
  2. Time horizon of the “present” (the best as you can the furthest you can care),
  3. Review of past actions (what can stay, what can be reproduced),
  4. Perspective of new actions (imitate good things without shame),
  5. Constraints of the present (prepare changes),
  6. Report of past actions (be responsible with the duty of cleaver memory),
  7. Development of new actions (with ? - old ennemies as possible as it can be).

When social implementation is the first goal of a model, it has to adapt to operations, functions and structures. “Explaination” sets in connections. You will have to explain how variables and algebra of used models reflect effectively social mechanisms. Social explanations have easy implementation. Difficulty has to do with consistency in beliefs and operative consensus. You would say that people are doing so . . . because of . . . then the strategy may be . . .You may not be far from protocols used in marketing but have a social benefit which you may think complex. Making the model implies technical operations and a mathematical system of equations: computerized procedures, experiments with analogies (like analogical schemes in electronics). .

With respect to practice or experience, you measure values and parameters. Making it in a democratic way means, at the minimum, socialize the proposal and accept changes as far as possible. Stay close to social actors and to the parameters and value their management. Too classy social models do no more than manipulate elusive abstractions to enhance indifference and passivity. Citizens' indifference and passivity are what speculative intrigues from behind the scene expect. Finally, “simulation” is submitted to social “assessment.” Simulation is a technical operation putting in correspondence, flexibility or ability to be specified. You imagine different scenarios, establish values, constants and coefficients and calibrate.

You will insist especially in the constraints of time defined by transversal relations. That is, the inputs from which you depend and the outputs that induce other inputs, including non-material ones (the localized energetic impulsing informations transformations (activations or cooling - als needing energy consumption); Integrating different branches. You will understand the relativity of cycles of activities in traditional economic studies. It is to synchronize (or not diachronize) and/or develop in (diachronic) parallels or across different branches or sectors, bypass collaterally; qualitatively as well as quantitatively. The unit of practices of such exercises can be as modest as your own individual level (feel free to be a sociali individualist or sweet-kind libertarian). At the community level, you will encourage the audience to fill the gaps and seek more social opportunities (not just financial ones). At more advanced levels, you will have to (sub) detail.

Imagine that, if productive circuits are already well chained together and extended over all your society, you can focus on a parts or nodes and seek more economies or savings. With more specific purposes, you will make this iike following the six steps-sectors we suggest. Any activity observes something like the very same elements: 1) prepare or bring, 2) make or use primary sector, 3) transforming secondary sector, 4) transport allocation distribution, 5) show sell and gain and 6) use recycle and restart the production, return and cycle. If your cycle of production has to be developed in a less advanced (market) place or country, take care that where you are, some general steps can fail and that is your development’s problem.

Prepare, engage, transformation, transport and distribution, inform and promote, sell; at best, each actor derives a model of its own, from a common accepted one, especially if its perspective is part and not all of a comprehensive model. It is possible to assign different tasks, democratic goals or complex questioning, and to inspire on the sort of knowledge required by the systemic plan of the scheme. Consider too that, after a distribution of tasks (like labor division) within complex situations, it is expected that commitments, intelligence, and motivation will fill the gaps and compensate deficiencies or limits of the logical frame. An olicognograph can provide options that allow to switch perspectives. It often includes a higher level of community integration for not turning communities program into short predatory strategies at the expense of relationships with other communities.

Then, in practice, you distribute activities and concepts in reasonable numbers between actors (sa usual). For a given project, imagine 2 to 4 strategic goals for each of them, half a dozen of tactical options, not much more than a dozen practical tasks. Consider also relative skills, consistency, and preferences of the actors. Human proximity does not have the sense to define utopian policies, even when generous and close to the reality of issues. General positive values are often common enough and if the mechanisms of integration and flows of exchange exist, good information on essential issues should suffice. The condition is to proportion it to flexible minds, trust in social practices, and let experience proceed.

Designing a common frame is a preliminary step. You can find an inspiring abstract to which you can refer better to conceptually. Better if it can be shared and help to get closer to the collective knowledge you seek as a work team or a community. You dispose basic concepts on a geometric picture. Incorporate layering and other sets of values for enough details. Change the structure and fit the different layers if required. You may feel that conceptual gaps will exist and you will logically expect people in charge to try to fill them so, in the preliminary process, be open to acceptable initiatives. To build this frame you start with pieces, join them, match different pictures, explore the geometry of categories and, maybe, an implicit logical organization will be revealed, especially when you are interested in including structure, or pieces of it. Your brain will do that for you; it is probably used to it; let it play. Read, manipulate. You are “cooking” ideas; you have your knowledge; free your mind; it has more than you think.

follow...