Feedback delivers goals. Busy administrators lack the Time and Energy to drive the required Knowledge free-flow in context. IT today is a helpless tool because a one-size-fit-all interaction process is impossible. My all-sizes-fit-one process creates the IT-is-inexhaustible-intelligent-energy paradigm. It fosters a teaming culture for Knowledge free-flow in context. Success follows.
The Goal: A quantum jump in the performance of organizations with the same resources.
The Problem: The stagnation of Collective Ability
It is likely that stagnation of Ability in applying Knowledge has suppressed the trust and the teamwork needed to emerge the reality, concert action and share responsibility. Fear of opportunism by peers, the reluctance to participate or commit, build-up of hierarchies for control, inability to progress the ‘And’ over the ‘Or’, rise of individual incentives, rampant cynicism of management wisdom, executive action disconnected with the Reality, and self-aggrandizement are some of the major symptoms of Stagnation of ability. Most of the problems that plague managements today like poor personnel autonomy, leaving brains at the front door, rising stress levels, internal strife, the reluctance to experiment, and politicization of decision making are amongst the secondary symptoms of the stagnation.
NOTE: The hurdles resolved by this hack are presented as Barriers for easier comprehension. Also, the hack has been abbreviated for easier absorbtion. Notes are linked where relevant. Rapid overview provided by presentation: Solution Overview (Click Here).
My Breakthrough Solution:
My recent hack ‘Solving the ages-old problem of the 'ignorant diagnosis' traces the ills of Management to the vicious Knowledge trap of either wishful thinking or the obvious that snares both Knowledgeable personnel and collectives. The trap is activated by multiple interpretations fitting the same facts and human folly of choosing self-interest over reality. My Hack ‘Achieving the ends of Knowledge with feedback’ explains how free flow of Knowledge in context serves to raise the Collective Ability. My Barrier 'Neglect of the accumulated Management Wisdom' introduces the concept of a compelling Knowledge Assembly Line to reliably assemble the interactions that take place spontaneously on each event as it circulates. The assembly coordinates the interactions to create a pipeline for the natural flow of Knowledge. The flow is quite similar to the popular Discussion Boards on Web News Stories. My hack ‘Creating a common language to unite stakeholders’ explains the development of a language that uses the Knowledge captured by the Knowledge Assembly Line to anchor Dialogue or free-flow of Knowledge. The concept of a language for daily usage explains why the Knowledge Assembly Line is adopted for all interactions.
The following is an insight to my Breakthrough process for converting IT from just a tool for Knowledge interactions to inexhaustible intelligent energy. My work goes on to harness this resource to provide the immense energy required for organizing and driving the Knowledge Assembly Line that tames Knowledge interactions.

The breakthrough does not create technology. It is a science developed from the universal norms, logic and relationships of teamwork. The science is used to harness technology. In brief:
The Architecture to conduct interactions and assure delivery of the Knowledge Assembly Line.
The technical breakthrough is based on my published paper (6) on the Science Of Interactions. I have now succeeded in migrating my implementation of the science to the enterprise scale. It consists of two parts:
Note: The hierarchy in my system is not meant for control but for guidance and mentoring a defined set in relation to a pre-defined domain.
Please CLICK HERE to view full notes for this Section

The change that organizations need to make in their core processes for adopting my solution:
ONLY replace use of email for business communication over the intranet / extranet with my infrastructure for all work and interaction. (Extranet covers the extended organization of selected customers and suppliers)
For decades now IT has sought to improve the application of Knowledge. The last such major attempt was the Knowledge Management movement that commenced in 1992, pioneered by Tom Davenport and Lawrence Prusak. While the movement met with great approval and created an extraordinary demand for a means to drive success, the adoption of its ‘IT-is-a-tool’ paradigm for Knowledge work was poor. It led Davenport (7) to wonder in 2003: “We’ve been experimenting with IT support for knowledge work for several decades now. When will we figure out what works?”
With support for launch of pilots my work is capable of establishing genuine convergence to transform trust and teamwork. Any organization may easily convince itself of the value-add before going the whole hog.
The testing will require a Windows server, an SQL server, a web server and clients of modest power running Windows operating system, SQL Express and SQL Light (SQL needed for offline operations). Popular software for document development like Windows Office suite is assumed on the clients. The organization would need to provide software for net meeting and calendaring and other popular network tools if it wishes to exploit them in conjunction. The required infrastructure is already in place in most organizations. Two levels of direct testing are possible:
Once convinced, the organization can roll out the way of working across the enterprise within a year with in-house teams.
I have developed the hack through sustained R&D over the past 20 years post a corporate career and my work with the Government Of India's system of administration, a legacy of the colonial era. I presented a technical paper on the governing science and the related architecture to transform the power of IT for delivering success at the Third International Conference on Intelligent System Design And Application held at OSU, Tulsa in August, 2003. However, the interpretation of the design and its usefulness for administration as presented in this Sketch is based on several works as well as my successful migration of the original design to the enterprise scale post 2003. The following are the major works referred to in the Sketch in order of appearance:
(1) Drucker Peter, F. (1992). ‘The new productivity challenge’, in Drucker, P. F. , Managing For The Future: The 1990s And Beyond: 79-95. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd.
(2) Buckingham Marcus. (August, 2001). Marcus Buckingham thinks your boss has an attitude problem. Fast Company, Issue 49. http://www.fastcompany.com/online/49/buckingham.html (Accessed July 01, 2010).
(3) Collins, J. (2001). Interview: Good questions, great answers. Fast Company.Com. http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/51/goodtogreat.html (Accessed July 01, 2010).
(4) MCKinsey Studies: Employee interactions: creating competitive advantages - McKinsey Quarterly - Organization - Strategic Organization:
https://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/Organization/Strategic_Organization/The_next_revolution_in_interactions_1690
(5) Nonaka, I. (February, 1996). Interview: Knowledge has to do with truth, goodness, and beauty. Claus Otto Scharmer. Dialog on leadership. http://www.dialogonleadership.org/docs/Nonaka-1996.pdf (Accessed July 01, 2010).
(6) Kumar, R. (2003). Using IT to assure a culture for success. In Ajith Abraham et al (Eds.), Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Intelligent Systems Design and Applications: 353. OSU, Tulsa, USA, Springer Verlag, Germany.
(7) Strassman Paul. (June, 2004). The Impact Of Transaction Economics. Information Economics Journal.
http://www.strassmann.com/pubs/iej/2004-06-b.pdf (Accessed July 01, 2010).
(8) Calgon Carbon. (1999). As reported by Davenport, T. and Cantrell, S. (2002). The art of work. Outlook Journal
http://www.accenture.com/Global/Research_and_Insights/Outlook/By_Alphabet/TheArtOfWork.htm (Accessed July 01, 2010).
Solution Overview Presentation at https://docs.google.com/present/edit?id=0AVka9xLnpQUNZGZ4cnF6cHpfNzU2Z2YyamRwZHM&hl=en&authkey=CJWu2r4H
My Breakthrough, developed over the last twenty years, solves major conceptual and technical problems to harness IT for organizing and driving the disciplines needed for superior Collective Ability. It delivers results regardless of chaos, change and volumes. My following Hacks and Barriers explain the problems and their resolution (the order gives the suggested order of reading though each is standalone):
The events and the times leading to my creation of compelling intelligent energy for driving Management Wisdom are described in my Story 'Combating disbelief and indifference in surfacing a basic innovation that harnesses technology to drive success'. I believe the story provides a valuable lesson for emerging basic innovations that hold the potential to transform society.
You know, Scott Ferguson was the first to feel uncomfortable with my concept of a Knowledge Assembly Line. Raised in Detroit he had a natural aversion to Assembly Lines and had developed a passion to design humanistic workplaces. Reluctant to raise his fears of dehumanization in the Knowledge workplace as an open comment he meaasaged me. We launched on a dialogue but before it could take hold he, for perhaps personal reasons, dropped out of MIX. I pray he is well.
I had foreseen fears of the kind expressed by Scott so sought to clarify the distinction between the Knowledge Assembly Line and Taylor's Assembly Line at the outset in the Challenges Section. You have read this hack in detail. Dan has spent time on my new hack 'Achieving the ends of Knowledge with Feedback' (http://www.managementexchange.com/hack/achieving-ends-knowledge-feedback). He has a deep concern for Trust & Teamwork in the workplace. He came to the conclusion the nature of intelligent energy created by my work had the substance to foster Trust. Teamwork was part of its science. I have decided his work has the power to guide the direction my implementation will take. i am looking forward to sharing my pilot results with him.
Perhaps a shared belief with rich experience is what you had in mind. Have a look at Dan's hack: 'Cracking the Code on Group Trust: The Team Trust Survey'.
Thanks for the abstract from Tao-Te-Ching. I shall keep it for inspiration.
Warm regards,
Raj Kumar
Thank you for expressing an interest in my hack. Dhiraj is excitable. This is one of those instances I am enjoying his excitement.
Essentialy my work re-writes a very basic conventional wisdom: that people own their knowledge and can choose not to share it. I have progressed on the principle that Knowledge workers must interact to perform their work. They can ill afford to have poor judgments. That would affect their survival. By leveraging norms of teamwork derived from evolution I have constructed a single process for conduct of all Knowledge work. This enables me offer an irresistible way to interact using IT. The value-add of my work is a by-product.
Re-writing a basic wisdom, I have discovered, is a tough proposition. It has taken me years to find the philosophy that guides all Knowledge work and establish my work is a method to implement that philosophy. I have explained this in my hack: http://www.managementexchange.com/hack/assuring-results-empowerment-and-... . I regret you may find this hack a bit cynical for I have not had a debate since long.
I have treated trust and teamwork as an essential component of feedback, and offer intelligent energy for management of interactions so that relationships can develop and constructive thinking takes place. Your survey wll guide me in shepherding my clients to evolve positive relationships. The great leap my work offers is that everything is organized for personnel who wish to contribute. There is no groundwork they need engage in for teamwork or feedback. They can hit the ground running with their ideas/insights.
I am going to copy this comment to my Compelling Energy site and would request you to do likewise with your response. I have the interests of the readers of my site in mind.
Regards,
Raj Kumar
Hello Raj,
Dan has an interesting hack on Group Trust. What I found refreshing was his candour in admitting priorties for creating trust. You may like to have a look at our dialogue on relevance of free-flow to trust.
Regards,
Dhiraj
Yoiu are a great chap. Thanks for adopting my work.
Regards,
Raj Kumar
Hello Raj,
Dan has an interesting hack on Group Trust. What I found refreshing was his candour in admitting priorties for creating trust. You may like to have a look at our dialogue on relevance of free-flow to trust.
Regards,
Dhiraj
Appears you have been totally absorbed in your new hack. Just a while back I wondered why you have faced problems in bringing such an obviously high value-add product/service to market. It is rare that consultants create a means to walk the talk. They talk and leave. Your infrastructure assures the results. I have already upddated this thought to your Language post. Do you think your work will be less appealing or applicable to MNCs? Could that be a reason for their lack of interest? In other words your work or process is not as universal as you believe it is.
Regards,
Dhiraj
Thanks for the question. I have yet to visit my Language hack. The problem of demand has to do with the entry barrier. I shall explain this more fully in my response at the Language hack. Let me focus on the MNC aspect here.
My work is a breakthrough in the utilization of technology and not creation of technology. In fact, it uses off the shelf technology. I expect most organizations will already have the operating systems and SQL server required in place. It is for this reason I stayed away from building an IT service organization. There is enough excess capacity in the market place. I reasoned why not leverage what exists? However, this is not understood by a large company like an MNC. They reason my work is new though the concept of Dialogue goes back ages and as per Drucker is the future, and my System may lack support and therefore would be an adventure. Besides, they reason, why have the large vendors not supported my science? Surely I could not have beaten the world to it. The doubt adds to their feeling of adventure. Scared of misadventure they have kept away from my work despite the truth that my work will significantly raise the competitive advantage of any company with the same resources and can be supported by any mature IT outfit since it is an exercise in organization. Since my costs are low they have satisfied themselves that they can buy into it once it is proven on the enterprise scale at multiples of the cost.
Perhaps the quote of Machiavelli I have stated in the Challenges section says it all.
Regards,
Raj Kumar
Hello,
On the last occassion, I had trouble updating a comment here. Encouraged by your other hack accepting my comment I am trying again here.
Prof. McAfee of MIT has sought to promote E 2.0 or Web 2.0 within the enterprise to obtain the free-flow of Knowledge displayed by the Discussion Board on web news stories. He has been unsucceful for reasons explained by your Barriers listed here. I liked your analysis of the problems and your solution of the Knowledge Assembly Line. I note it has worked in the ossified environs of the Government.
I wish your Assembly Line success. The world needs it to exploit its limited reserves of mental energy. Now even the humans know that the world is in a mess.
Regards,
Dhiraj
Thanks for your understanding and good wishes. The key will be my ability to bring about a shift of mind from Knowledge Management and love of Knowledge to Knowledge Application. It is quite like effecting a change in the mind of parents from love to Freedom as the children grow up. They have to encourage interactions with the world and develop relationship for mentoring. I am sure they would wish they could do it with technology.
Presently my means for Dialogue is designed for the corporate space :)
Regards,
Raj Kumar
Hello Raj,
I visited with Nayantara while passing through Delhi and blindly used her computer to catch up on MIX. Just realised I have made silly errors in posting you. Sorry..
Regards,
Rohit
Hello Bill,
I have freely progressed to build a hack using yours as a starting point. It may be accessed at http://www.managementexchange.com/hack/intrinsic-force-superior-management. It progresses your objectives. I pray it shall meet with your approval.
Regards,
Rohit
Dear Raj Kumar,
Your comment in your new Hack at: http://www.managementexchange.com/hack/creating-common-language-unite-st... on the poor response to problems by MIX staff has touched a raw nerve. MIX is a great idea, well integrated with the software. But its conduct is depressing. Firstly, they have yet to revert to me on the problems I faced in registering about 45 days ago. Had I not changed computers I would have still been struggling to join! But even more deplorable is the way contributions are graded. People can downgrade a Sketch without submitting a Build or a Comment! This is a competition. Rivalry is inescapable. Grading without transparency and any responsibility makes it easy for Rivals to bypass merit and climb over the works ahead of them. I have seen your new hack perform like a yo-yo. This time the grading is visible. Does it mean even the MIX authorities are engaging in the cowardly act of blind evaluations of content?
Just yesterday McKinsey released a new article on the poor attention paid to interactions though they govern the conduct of Knowledge work (see https://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/Organization/Strategic_Organization/Bo...). Nobody has the slightest inkling of how to tame (your word) Knowledge interactions and this is at the root of Management problems and stagnation of productivity. Your work is the only one that not only understands the importance of interactions and the havoc their growth is causing but actually proceeds to leverage a powerful philosophy and CREATES an inexhaustible energy source to tame them. You have taken great pains to explain your Hack and how it will bring alive the accumulated Management Wisdom. I have already expressed my expectation that your work will release a force to advance the conduct of Management along the trail blazed by the likes of David Packard and Ken Iverson and others. Could MIX have desired anything more? In the face of so much ignorance I have decided to confine my contributions to your work.
I could be wrong in my assessment of your work but it depresses me the MIX staff are making no effort to understand your work, grading your Hacks without so much as commenting on them and throwing the field open to opportunism. I am going to update this comment to each of your seven contributions in protest against the prevailing ignorance and attitude and give top marks to those of your contributions I have not graded. They deserve the marks.
I must do something: The MIX staff are throwing away the beautifully crafted opportunity created by Gary Hamel to advance Management.
Dear Raj Kumar,
Your comment in your new Hack at: http://www.managementexchange.com/hack/creating-common-language-unite-st... on the poor response to problems by MIX staff has touched a raw nerve. MIX is a great idea, well integrated with the software. But its conduct is depressing. Firstly, they have yet to revert to me on the problems I faced in registering about 45 days ago. Had I not changed computers I would have still been struggling to join! But even more deplorable is the way contributions are graded. People can downgrade a Sketch without submitting a Build or a Comment! This is a competition. Rivalry is inescapable. Grading without transparency and any responsibility makes it easy for Rivals to bypass merit and climb over the works ahead of them. I have seen your new hack perform like a yo-yo. This time the grading is visible. Does it mean even the MIX authorities are engaging in the cowardly act of blind evaluations of content?
Just yesterday McKinsey released a new article on the poor attention paid to interactions though they govern the conduct of Knowledge work (see https://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/Organization/Strategic_Organization/Bo...). Nobody has the slightest inkling of how to tame (your word) Knowledge interactions and this is at the root of Management problems and stagnation of productivity. Your work is the only one that not only understands the importance of interactions and the havoc their growth is causing but actually proceeds to leverage a powerful philosophy and CREATES an inexhaustible energy source to tame them. You have taken great pains to explain your Hack and how it will bring alive the accumulated Management Wisdom. I have already expressed my expectation that your work will release a force to advance the conduct of Management along the trail blazed by the likes of David Packard and Ken Iverson and others. Could MIX have desired anything more? In the face of so much ignorance I have decided to confine my contributions to your work.
I could be wrong in my assessment of your work but it depresses me the MIX staff are making no effort to understand your work, grading your Hacks without so much as commenting on them and throwing the field open to opportunism. I am going to update this comment to each of your seven contributions in protest against the prevailing ignorance and attitude and give top marks to those of your contributions I have not graded. They deserve the marks.
I must do something: The MIX staff are throwing away the beautifully crafted opportunity created by Gary Hamel to advance Management.
Hello Nayantara,
Thank you for your appreciation and kind wishes.
Your Barrier is a remarkable appreciation of the direction charted by Gary Hamel. I found your perception concerning the importance of knowledge over people provocative and am sure it will make a valuable contribution to thinking on management.
Thank you for your understanding of the forces at play as represented by me. In particular, your quotation from MKinsey's study highlighting the importance Knowledge application has acquired in the work place merits repetition here:
“…70 percent of all US jobs created since 1998—4.5 million, or roughly the combined US workforce of the 56 largest public companies by market capitalization—require judgment and experience.”
Other observations of McKinsey’s study lend substance to the problem framed by me:
• Recent studies—including landmark research McKinsey conducted in 19972—show that specialization, globalization, and technology are making interactions far more pervasive in developed economies. As Adam Smith predicted, specialization tends to atomize work and to increase the need to interact.
• The growth of interactions represents a broad shift in the nature of economic activity. At the turn of the last century, most nonagricultural labor in business involved extracting raw materials or converting them into finished goods. We call these activities transformational because they involve more than just jobs in production.3 By the turn of the 21st century, however, only 15 percent of US employees undertook transformational work such as mining coal, running heavy machinery, or operating production lines—in part because in a globalizing economy many such jobs are shifting from developed to developing nations. The rest of the workforce now consists of people who largely or wholly spend their time interacting.
• Eight years after McKinsey's 1997 study, the firm's new research on job trends in a number of sectors finds that companies are hiring more workers for complex than for less complex interactions. Recording a shipment of parts to a warehouse, for example, is a routine interaction; managing a supply chain is a complex one.
Thank you very much for helping me make my point.
Regards,
Raj Kumar
Hello Raj Kumar,
I could not reconcile Gary Hamel’s writings with the direction adopted by the views expressed in MIX and was helpless. I did not have a concrete starting point to disagree till I came across your hack.
I must confess your hack was forbidding with its length and its references to IT but the promise of intelligent energy was sufficient for me to seek its core. Stripped to the bare essentials your hack has a simple enough message: IT may be reliably harnessed to compel the practice of meaningful dialogue across any organization on each business event, i.e., free flow of knowledge with the enthusiastic support and commitment of the personnel without any form of brain washing. I appreciate this translates into trust and teamwork, and compelling organization and drive for the collective application of knowledge.
My Barrier will provide you an idea of my understanding of the implications of your hack and how I perceive its importance.
With best wishes for the pilots you are seeking,
Nayantara
Rohit Kashyap
October 15, 2010 at 7:15amHello Raj,
I was so inspired by this hack that I used it to create one of my own. It was a complete answer to my search for a Management Solution that evolved judgments. I shall repeat:
The Secret waits for the insight
Of eyes uncluded by Longing
Those that are bound by desire
See only the outward container.
Tao-Te-Ching observed that centuries ago but the way to the secret was missing. It is missing even today for a Group. Put 5 people of IQ=130 in a team and you are likely to get a team IQ of sub 100. Not that people are natural fighters. It is just that they lack a method to agree. That is why your Language hack appealed to me.
But a method needs energy that lays the groundwork. That is what the art of organization is all about. It lays the groundwork for people to indulge their beliefs. Your compelling energy does that. I had hoped Bill would warm to it but perhaps he wanted to understand how you achieved the magic. I am taking your exhibits as your word. They make what you say plausible.
Best wishes
Rohit