D as Diagramming: Tacit Trends and Shared Transformation
How to develop new concepts with Diagram Notation?
This post is part of the D as Diagramming project which aims to explore the power of diagrams and diagramming. What I really want to know is about the value of diagrams for turning tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge.
How to turn tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge? I don’t have a systematic answer. I often coin a new term and develop it as a new concept. In this manner, I can use some short keywords to name my rough ideas. Later, I can use these names as a tool for further thinking.
Some new concepts are born from the diagramming activity. For example, the Defining Zone!
Today I’d like to share two new concepts for the iART Framework: Tacit Trends and Shared Transformation.
The iART Framework Notation
The diagram below is the basic model of the iART Framework. The name iART stands for i +Activity + Relationship + Themes.
The iART framework offers an ecological perspective on personal adult development. The term “ecological perspective” means the following three contexts of personal development:
- Practice context: the “Know — Act” ecology (Activity).
- Spatial context: the “Self — Other” ecology (Relationship)
- Temporal context: the “Present — Future” ecology (Time).
You can find more details from a previous article: D as Diagramming: The iART Framework.
The above diagram is the expanded model of the iART Framework. I use a method called Diagram Notation to make it. What’s Diagram Notation? It means the process of adding notes on a diagram and turning a basic model into an expanded model. It also means the product of the final expanded model.
On Sept 1, 2021, I published an article titled D as Diagramming: iART Diagram Notation and used the iART Framework as an example of Diagram Notation. I introduced the following concepts to expand the basic model of the iART Framework:
- Objective v.s. Object
- Result v.s. Reward
- Competence v.s. Complexity
- Motive v.s. Moment
In fact, I designed the “Objective — Object” diagram on August 23, 2021. The “Competence — Complexity” diagram and the “Result — Reward” diagram were designed on August 24, 2021. The last one, the “Motive — Moment” diagram was designed on August 27, 2021.
These sub-diagrams form a Diagram Notation for the iART Framework. However, the Diagram Notation doesn’t need a final version. We should consider Diagram Notation as both a process and a product. As a process, the Diagram Notation is open to add new sub-diagrams in order to expand the basic model of a knowledge framework.
Three “T” sub-diagrams
On August 31, 2020, I reflected on the following sub-diagrams of the iART Framework and designed three new sub-diagrams.
The above three sub-diagrams represent the basic structure of the iART Framework which offers an ecological perspective on personal adult development. The term “ecological perspective” means the following three contexts of personal development:
- Practice context: the “Know — Act” ecology (Activity).
- Spatial context: the “Self — Other” ecology (Relationship)
- Temporal context: the “Present — Future” ecology (Time).
The first sub-diagram is about practice context: Activity. The second sub-diagram is about spatial context: Relationship. The third sub-diagram is about temporal context: Time.
On August 31, I realized there are three keywords behind this basic structure. Thus, I used three “T” words to describe them. The first one is “Trust” which is about the relationship between Self and Other. The quality of trust decides the information disclosure and the model of interactions.
The second one is “Trend” which is about the relationship between Present and Future. Trends are the tendency of changes of the world. It inspires people’s decisions at present and their anticipations about the future.
The third one is “Transformation” which is about the Activity. The iART Framework aims to discuss adult development, so the transformation is about personal growth which should be considered as the outcome of the Activity.
To be honest, these three new keywords are just language engagement. I just use some new words to describe some relevant topics which are not new! However, the next step is magic.
Emerging New Concepts
I saw these new words within the iART Framework and I got two new ideas. The first one is Tacit Trends and the second one is Shared Transformation.
The Tacit Trends mean the Self and the Other share some insights about some trends and they don’t share these insights publicly because they want to keep these ideas as private knowledge.
Trends are important for business innovation. Some design strategy agencies develop trend cards as a part of their toolkit. For example, the pictures below are screenshots of a design toolkit from Futurice.
Tacit Trends are only shared by the Self and the Other in order to service the development of the Transactional Anticipatory System which considers the Self and the Other as a whole. For example, a startup’s founder and its investors can be understood as a Transactional Anticipatory System. The founder and the investors have some Tacit Trends because they have to make some decisions about the dynamic of public trends. These Tacit Trends are their business secrets.
The Shared Transformation means the development of a Transactional Anticipatory System. For example, the growth of a startup means a shared transformation of the founder and the investors.
I think these two new concepts should be part of the iART Framework, especially the Transactional Analysis. Also, we should connect these two concepts with Predictive Model and Feedforward Bias.
You can find more details about Transactional Analysis, Predictive Model, and Feedforward Bias from a previous article: D as Diagramming: The iART Framework.
Knowing-for-Us
Last year I published an article titled HERO U — A New Framework for Knowledge Heroes. The HERO U framework suggested three kinds of knowing: knowing-for-all, knowing-for-us, and knowing-for-me.
The Knowing-for-us activity is located in the Echozone container. The outcome and motivation is about spreading and applying public knowledge to professional domain practice, curating and reflecting on personal practical experience, and connecting different domains in order to make new shared knowledge for participants. The corresponding Objectives of Knowing are Specific Theory, Abstract Model, Concrete Model, and Domain Practice.
I also used the diagram below to discuss a typology of “Founder — Investor” relationship in a previous article D as Diagramming: The iART Diagram Network. This diagram shares the same one meta-diagram with the above HERO U framework. They both use three containers and the middle container is Container Z (also called Echozone).
The Container Z at the above diagram includes four types of actions: inspire, intervene, interpret, and improve. These actions are about daily actions of a startup and a formal relationship of “founder — investor”. I consider the Container Z space as a Transactional Anticipatory System.
If we put the HERO U framework and the iART Framework together, then we can connect the Knowing-for-us activity with Transactional Anticipatory System.
Thus, Tacit Trends and Shared Transformation should be part of the Knowing-for-us activity.
What magic! I just work on one thing but it benefits one other thing!
You are most welcome to connect via the following social platforms:
Polywork: https://www.polywork.com/oliverding
Twitter: https://twitter.com/oliverding
Boardle: https://www.boardle.io/users/oliver-ding
Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/oliverding
License
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) License. Please click on the link for details.
