Business Design: A Misnomer


I just came from IDEO’s Tim Brown’s blog, Design Thinking, post on “A Curriculum for Business Design” and I can see his want to emphasize the need for design, but he misses the point.

I think the word “design” is becoming too much of a “to a hammer, every problem is a nail” conundrum. Every problem is not a design problem.  Business is very diverse.  What I would like to see is the following curriculum:

Business Science Inductive (Problems and Visions)
Business Science Deductive (Entrepreneurship and Leadership)
Business Design (Climates and Trends)
Business Engineering (Location and Movement)
Business Skill (Innovation and Professionalism)
Business Training (Imitation and Apprenticeship)
Business Education (Memorization and Theory)
Business Networking (Fraternity and Sorority)
Business Products (Culturing and Manufacturing)
Business Services (Sharing and Caring)
Business Marketing (Branding and Pricing)
Business Transactions (Closing and Accounting)

Design plays a part in solving every problem, but not every part of a problem is a design problem.

Let’s instill the diversity of business with design as part of the solution, not the only solution.

Oh, and if you call a problem an “issue”, that is another misnomer.  Problems are scientific and can be solved.  Issues are political and can never be solved.

Forget Moore’s Law, Enter Huang’s Law

Jen-Hsun Huang, CEO of Nvidia Corp., creator of the Graphic Processing Unit, shares his vision of the future.

We are no longer talking HorsePower, we are talking HorseTeamPower.  Personal Supercomputing.

Vodpod videos no longer available.





Consider having:

Iconic vocabularies.
Iconic grammars.
Iconic syntax.
Iconic linguistics.
Iconic dictionaries.
Iconic thesaurii.
Iconic wikis.
Iconic semiotics.
Iconic animation.
Iconic context.
Iconic databases.
Iconic functions.
Iconic organization.
Iconic networks.
Iconic events.
Iconic fonts.
Iconic classics.
Iconic metrics.
Iconic audio.
Iconic video.
Iconic mechanio (pressure)
Iconic olfio (smell)
Iconic gustio (taste)
Iconic thermio (heat)
Iconic nocio (pain)
Iconic equilibrio (balance and acceleration)
Iconic proprio (body position)







Computing is going through an interesting process:

Note: PL means programming language

Nodular Computer: Mainframe: Priesthoods operate
Nodular Network: ARPANET: Priesthoods connect
Nodular Data: Variable: Noun: Priesthoods Query
Nodular Language: Variable PL: Assembler: Priesthoods Manipulate
Nodular Communication: Variable Packet: TCP/IP Priesthoods Communicate
Nodular Schedule: Sequential Batch

Linear Computer: Minicomputer: Scribes operate
Linear Network: Ethernet: Scribes connect
Linear Data: String dbms: Verb: Scribes Query
Linear Language: String PL: 3GL: Scribes Manipulate
Linear Communication: String Packet: HTML: Scribes Communicate
Linear Schedule: Multi-Tasking

Tabular Computer: Microcomputer: Educated operate
Tabular Network: Internet: Educated communicate
Tabular Data: Relational dbms: Noun Set: Educated Query
Tabular Language: Relational PL: SQL: Educated Manipulate
Tabular Communication: Relation Packet: XML: Educated Communicate
Tabular Schedule: Multi-Threading


Netular Computer: Scale-free CPUs: Laypeople operate
Netular Network: High Frequency Gravity Wave Network: Laypeople communicate
Netular Data: Associational DBMS: Verb Set: Laypeople Query
Netular Language: Assocational PL: Iconic Language: Laypeople Manupulate
Netular Communication: Association Packet: XMPEGML: Laypeople Communicate
Netular Schedule: AlwaysOn




Iconic Language will Internationalize visual communication.





Drucker Enterprise Framework Dimensions

The columns of this new Enterprise Framework are the dimensions.  I have decided to use a consistent set of terms to create a taxonomy that is meaningful and specific.

The Brain: Hardwiring and Softwiring

I’m just finishing a very fine book by Steven Pinker, The Languange Instinct: How the Mind Creates Language

and several years ago I read Donald D. Hoffman’s book, Visual Intelligence: How We Create What We See. Both books deal with the same subject: What part of our minds are hardwired–instinct–and what parts of our minds are softwired–reason. It is a truly fascinating exploration.

Stephen Pinker in The Language Instinct very thoroughly explores all the aspects of spoken language. He discusses how broken pidgin languages are turned into grammatically rich creoles by children. He explains that whether a person learns a language or not they can have complex thought he calls Mentalese. He explains Chomsky’s concept of a Universal Grammar and how, with language, learning does not cause mental complexity, but mental complexity causes learning. He reveals that children have an acute sense of the morphology of words and rapidly acquire vocabulary as listemes because of the nature of the relationship between child, adult and reality. The perception of speech as well as the physical production of speech is explored. How we derive meaning from language rejects the technical concept of packets being transmitted and received for a much more subjective process of interpretation. The ability of children to learn language is treated as an evolutionary trade off existing only long enough to adopt the tribes language and then shutdown to make way for other special priorities. The “Language Organ” or region of the brain that is responsible for speech is narrowed down. The chain of being is pushed aside for the bush of evolution to reveal that hundreds of thousands of generations existed for language and homo sapiens sapiens to evolve separate from all our other primate cousins. The difference between living spoken language is separated from living written language, the discipline required for each and the fact that language is never in decay. Finally the relativism of the Standard Social Science Model (SSSM) or tabula rasa as proposed by Margaret Mead is rejected, Pinker takes sides with the Evolutionary Psychologists stating that environment alone cannot create the complexity of the mind, the mind must have many complex modules to be able to learn from the environment at all. He discusses Donald E. Brown’s Universal Person (UP) inspired by Chomsky’s Universal Grammar (UG). Finally, Pinker tries to define the modules of the human mind and here I get excited as I find I am able to fit them easily into the Six Hats, Six Coats model. Pinker says that language is a system and extrapolates to say humans are a system of both hardwiring and softwiring.

Hoffman’s book deals with an aspect of mind that more easily subscribes to the module concept than language because it is a much more detached, empirical exercise to test for the visual hardwiring that humans have through the use of visual illusions. Hoffman takes us through many aspects of vision such as facial recognition, edge and shadow and color and the perceptual development of children to reveal what appears to be hardwired and softwired. He concludes with a relativistic statement, but I think that he chooses this because of the political desire of scientists to distance themselves from the eugenics of the first half of the 20th century instead of an objective conclusion that, yes, we have a complex module in our brain specifically hardwired and softwired for vision as used by our species. In other words, when presented with the depth of Steven Pinker’s work compared to the breadth of Donald Hoffman’s work, I believe that we do have a vision instinct.

All in all I believe that Steven Pinker’s and Donald Hoffman’s work is revealing that humans minds are far more than just an empty neural net at birth. That in fact there is an evolved complex predefined structure that humans make use of through the learning stages of childhood to understand their environment that diminishes to adult levels at puberty. Consequently, no form of Artificial Intelligence will succeed unless it also comes with a robust collection of Artificial Instincts.

Related Article:

Atheism: More Vision, Less Derision



The frauds of religion are two:


Love your consciousness, love other’s consciousness as your own.