{"id":163258,"date":"2020-06-22T12:00:44","date_gmt":"2020-06-22T11:00:44","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/?p=163258"},"modified":"2020-06-23T07:03:01","modified_gmt":"2020-06-23T06:03:01","slug":"identifying-polyhedra-enabling-memorable-strategic-mapping","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/2020\/06\/identifying-polyhedra-enabling-memorable-strategic-mapping\/","title":{"rendered":"Identifying Polyhedra Enabling Memorable Strategic Mapping"},"content":{"rendered":"

Visualization of Organization and Strategic Coherence through 3D Modelling<\/em><\/p>\n

Introduction<\/strong><\/p>\n

22 Jun 2020 –<\/em> Strategies, declarations and sets of values and principles typically take the form of lists with a specific number of items. The number selected often varies between 8 and 30. Examples are the 8 Millennium Development Goals<\/a> of the UN and the 30-fold Universal Declaration of Human Rights<\/a>. Currently a major focus is given to the 17 Sustainable Development Goals<\/a> of the UN. There is seemingly a total lack of explanation as to why any given number is appropriate. Nor is there any interest in how such patterns may be more or less appropriate from a systemic perspective. Little consideration is given to the manner in which the items noted in each case are related — let alone how the many different strategic articulations, based on different choices of numbers, are related to one another.<\/p>\n

It is possible to imagine that each such set could be mapped onto a polygon<\/a> in 2D with a distinctive number of sides — potentially reflective of seats around a negotiation table. It is also possible to explore how the elements of any such articulation could be mapped in 3D onto a polyhedron<\/a> — to be variously rotated for inspection in virtual reality. Possibilities in that respect are discussed separately (Psychosocial Implication in Polyhedral Animations in 3D<\/a><\/em>, 2015; Towards Polyhedral Global Governance: complexifying oversimplistic strategic metaphors<\/a><\/em>, 2008).<\/p>\n

Especially relevant to this argument is how any such mapping increases memorability and communicability — and how it enables the set to be comprehended as a whole. These considerations can be considered vital to any sense of coherence of the set as an integrative pattern — as distinct from a simple checklist or a “to do” list. Are many people able to recall the elements in the patterns identified in the following, or why they include the number of elements in each case:<\/p>\n