Model of stable conditions and developments of a system (states, parties, firms)

If the person knows, that he does not know, — learn he. If the person does not know, that he knows, — wake he. If the person knows, that he knows, — listen to he. If the person does not know, that he does not know, — escape from him.
 
In the article about the rarefied sets, I tried to reflect very little that will be, if probabilities of presence and absence of elements in some system have boundary (low and high) significances. In the same place I have assumed, that the system can have four stable conditions. And the Chinese popular wisdom has considerably helped me to understand with the given problem, on what I to you now and I shall tell.
 
Up to understanding of essence of processes which condition influences or this or that factor with some probability does not influence, I supposed, that the system can have three stable (in time) conditions (for example: «in the name of the father, the son and sacred spirit», «three sons was at the father», «three desires»). However with preparation of materials on the rarefied sets it became clear to me, that equilibrium conditions at a system should be four. What have I overlooked in the reasonings (or whom)? And the god who sends sacred spirit. And father at whom was three sons. And gin which grants three desires. So, there is a fourth stable condition of a system. For me that fact became amusing, that popular wisdom not only describes stable conditions of a system, but also and our behaviour for each of these conditions (look an epigraph), as some strategic planning.
 
For obvious understanding of a problem, I have drawn some figure, some kind of « magic quadrate Bobrovnikova ». On it the rectangle broken on four equal parts (component quadrates) is represented, each of which describes one of stable conditions of an arbitrary system. The parties of my rectangle intersected under a right angle are probability scales of realization and not realization of the script of development, a membership of an element, influence of the factor and to that similar, depending on researched object.
 
three scripts of development of systemLet's conduct the analysis of the diagram submitted in figure, by the example of an epigraph to this article. And at the same time also we shall consider possible three scripts of development of a system, both aside progressions, and aside regressions (arrows 1, 2, 3).
 
So, « the person knows, that he knows ». That is, the probability of comprehension of that fact, that low probability of absence of knowledge (YES-YES is great; KNOWLEDGE OF KNOWLEDGE). Sufficient for translational development a condition of a system at which the greatest well-being and prosperity of the majority of its elements (a green small square) is observed. It is confirmed and planned behaviour — «listen to he, and you will live also well, as well as he». And differently, what for at him to study? An example from area of management. If we know, that one thousand screws will be twisted, if there is an order to twirl one thousand screws and how such performing discipline such condition of any company and corporation can be characterized as satisfactory and progressive as the development of the company is possible to plan very precisely is reached.
 
The following case if « the person does not know, that he knows ». That is low probability of understanding of that fact, that low probability of absence of knowledge. The knowledge is present, but it is not used in complete force. Hence, it is necessary «to wake» knowledge to life to improve life (a blue small square — NO-YES; IGNORANCE ABOUT KNOWLEDGE). As applied problems of management in a situation with screws the following is received — we do not have knowledge of how the order will be precisely executed to twirl one thousand screws (absence of effective administration managerial control). In this case it is important to understand, that the company is controlled in technological sense, but thus we know nothing about how it is reached. Hence, it is necessary to make use expert experience which will help us to understand, how our company copes, and as it to use for the good (to wake). Situation not too bad though hides in itself dangers, as, not knowing as we have organized management, we can disorganize all control system of our company (state). And also at the further development we cannot make use completely our successful performing experience of management.
 
«If the person knows, that he does not know» That is, the probability of understanding is high, that the knowledge is absent (high probability of absence of knowledge) learn he. This acceptance of that fact that it is necessary to develop strenuously self-organizing of a system (a yellow small square — YES-NO; KNOWLEDGE OF IGNORANCE). There is a real need to learn to cope and live well for we recognize, that affairs at us go at random. All is not too bad and from the point of view of management. We understand with all evidence what operate our company we cannot. We do not know, that will happen, if the order will be given will screw up one thousand screws, perhaps, instead of screws to be screwed up nuts. Hence, it is necessary to learn to operate the company in technological sense, will learn to plan production. For crash of our enterprise hereinafter can follow.
 
At last a gloomy grey small square at the very bottom, a condition of a system at which very much it would be desirable to escape. « If the person does not know, that he does not know » (NO-NO; IGNORANCE ABOUT IGNORANCE). It already probably occurred crash of a system. These are revolutions and shocks, it is change of an authority and anarchy. It is distemper. Well if is where to run (for example: for ocean). And if there is no place? There are only two possible outputs from crisis, or the system starts to collapse (is destroyed) or to revive, but already in the other qualitative condition (to regenerate). And actually, the states apparent by an eternal stronghold break up, dictators come to power, fires of inquisition blaze, archipelagoes Gulag are under construction. The manager does not know and at all does not assume (or incorrectly assumes) that will happen if will return the order to screw up one thousand screws. « Go there, I do not know where. Bring that, I do not know that » — only in a fairy tale this problem can have acceptable and good solution. Imagine the company which not only is unguided, but its management at all does not know about it. The situation is extremely dangerous both to it, and for those who tries to cooperate to it for its behaviour is absolutely unpredictable. And popular wisdom learns «to run» at such state of affairs. 
 
The big happiness was for Russia, that within the hardest tests country was headed by the genius and unshakable commander Stalin (U.Churchill)
 
Known a policy I have reduced expression not casually. From my diagram logically follows, that in a condition of a crisis situation (a grey small square) if not crash of a system as such should appear (to be generated) a certain force which will supply movement of a system in a direction of a green small square is possible. It is confirmed by remarkable articles Lev N. Gumilev from a series «the Ethnoorb and passionarity » in which it is proved, that in complicated historical periods in any human community always there is the certain political movement headed by its chief and providing development of company in a progressive direction.
 
Three outcomes (arrows 1, 2, 3) for revival of a system (the state, the enterprise) are possible: through self-knowledge (development of own knowledge — ignorance about knowledge), through tutoring (import knowledge — knowledge of ignorance) and passing intermediate conditions, directly to the light future (tunnel effect — knowledge of knowledge). Similar reasonings remind national fairy tales when the main hero should choose three paths, thus he always something risks to lose. And always the fastest path of reaching of the purpose, it the most dangerous, and circumscribed as « road which goes directly ». It is impossible to assert univalently which of directions of development is the best. All of them are not deprived defects and acceptable only in strictly certain conditions. I have reduced the reference to fantastic characters not simply so. We, people, intuitively have the given knowledge, but only they are not hardly formalized to the full to use them in practice.
 
Let's talk about screws. There is a path of development 1, through tutoring of the company to screw up one thousand screws if there is such order. It is possible, when the administration accepts that fact, that in the company there is no efficient control engineering procedures which is possible for acquiring as external knowledge. And actually it means tutoring a performing level of an authority to exact performance of orders and orders of managers. Delay of time of realization of similar plans results in devaluation of the managing staff and destruction of the upper echelons of management as corollaries of outflow of the staff in a technological orb.
 
The following path of development (2) passes through comprehension of that fact, that « so further to live it is impossible » though the performing level of an authority works rather effectively. Hence, it is necessary to acquire knowledge of how to generate such direction of development at which orders on screwing up thousand screws (which will be correctly returned will be screwed up). In this case also it is impossible to delay terms as already technological level of management by virtue of incompetent commands will collapse.
 
The most favourable and expensive path is directly to the light future (3). A complicated solution as it is necessary to change not only technological component managerial processes, but also understanding of how it is done (administration managerial control). High expenditures of labour at all levels of management will be necessary and the managing centre should be formed highly to supply exact performance of the order on screwing up thousand screws and as such order correctly to generate.
 
It is necessary to understand, that each of the submitted possible directions of development at all has no such smooth structure as I have drawn. They have discrete structure. For each plot there is a certain directedness and length of distance from one point up to other (some kind of a vector). The distance, in this case, can be considered as magnitude proportional to certain resources (for example: to money) which are necessary for expending for transition in our probability space. There is one more measurement which is not present on my diagram. This time. Yes, to move from one point in other the certain resources and time are required.
 
Here the principle of indeterminacy which is circumscribed by me in one of articles starts to work. It is formulated as follows — product of a resource for a while always more or is equal the certain magnitude. Actually it means, that in probability space the outcome is not always predicted. However that it to reach for the certain time in any case it is necessary to expend the certain resources (for fulfilment of the indicated inequality).
 
Our system would be desirable to change the condition aside a green small square for the certain time. For this purpose we are compelled to spend some of resources according to the indicated equation. But in practice it is become clear, that it was required from us to time more, than we planned. And if we have planned sequential actions (the following one after another)? And if even one of line-ups is infringed, all our gains in outcome on all paths of development can appear vain. So affairs go at random.
 
If we can mathematical evaluate a position of our enterprise on the basis of an offered technique accordingly we can plan and behaviour of our system in probability space. Application of the similar tool if a horizontal axis to present by the way a certain scale of efficiency of administration managerial control, and horizontal — by the way scales of technological backwardness can be more interesting. Accordingly, planning transition in a direction of a green small square and comparing the obtained outcome, it is possible to judge progress (recourse) of the human community entrusted to us.

Decision making principles in management

First of all, let's describe the basic mechanisms of interaction between people, a sort of materials used for joining the bricks of management hierarchy, our company, family and state relations. There are three of them: I can order someone to do something — «authoritarizm», I can ask someone to do something on certain conditions or without them — «compromise», I can wait until my partner takes the initiative and performs corresponding actions — «consensus». 
 
Consensus
 
Consensus is a Japanese style of decision-making, i.e. keep discussing until the decision appears and becomes obvious, or until any participant takes the responsibility for some decision. Thus, the decision is accepted only in case it is clear for all the participants or at least for several ones.
 
This system of decision-making is the most effective one from the point of view of the minimization of risk. It is characterized by a strong discipline of its participants, and consequently high product quality. However this system is rather slow, having a high risk of refusal and breakdown in strong dynamic processes. As a rule, such management systems are used on the top management level. One of the important criteria of its use is almost equal social position of the participants. However, the last thesis is not always obligatory, but the involving of less socially provided members requires professional growth prospects (career — it is like the Japanese experience, is not it?). In Russia this system is used as a means of operation for one of the two reasons: either it does not suggest any growth prospects, or the latter do not assume growth of social well-being.
 
Human factor in the given system almost does not influence the decision making, because the decision, even though accepted by one person, is supposed to represent the essence of a collective product of thinking, because every member believes in the correctness of accepted decisions.
 
Compromise
 
«You give me — I give you », i.e. a decision is accepted at the level of some compromises. The decision can be right or wrong, and the one responsible for it will either be rewarded or not. This system of decision-making is very dynamic and operative and guarantees a social growth to its participants. This system represents the basis of any young business.
 
However, this principle cannot always give the best results due to the subjectivity of both problem statement and the evaluation of product quality (are the best results so necessary, given the limited time of the product use?). This is a typical principle according to which the American society works, where everything has it own cost, where professional rises and falls depend on correct and timely accepted decisions, and the latter is very well paid.
 
This method is strongly subjective, being dependent on certain people and used as a rule for building average management levels. It is the area where a conservative way of thinking can bring only good (for example, doctors, teachers, etc.).
 
Authoritarizm
 
Authoritarizm is the style of management accepted in the military forces. The responsibility for accepted decisions lays at the top level of hierarchy, while the bottom levels of hierarchy implicitly carry out the orders of the higher ones.
 
This style of management is highly operative not only in terms of time, but also in terms of the scale of ranks (otherwise it would not be used in the army), it is also completely subjective and conservative. The efficiency of this principle depends entirely on the accurate and detailed statement of the problem on higher levels. The given system requires strong rules and algorithms for performance of various actions; otherwise the system stays idle or carries out false commands. Along with that the system is conservative and has a slight feedback, as the principles of management in military forces have hardly changed for many years.
 
 
It will be wrong to say, that any of the three listed systems is ideal from the point of view of management and decision-making. Each of them is good enough only in case it is properly used in specific time and conditions. That means that the style of management may change if the external changes occur. For example, in crisis period the transition from the compromise to the authoritative system for the bottom management staff can significantly increase labor productivity (this method was used by lots of enterprises during the Second World War).
 
Unfortunately, there are not so many companies in the world, which have the rules of control systems usage. It is quite clear, that a skilled manager, using his own experience, applies principles of management style variation. However, it is rather dangerous to make a manager the only one responsible for it, as it has often caused the crash of many companies. The manager accepts a wrong decision, and using the authoritative principle, forces the whole company's structure to work accordingly («They misunderstood me, so they made it all wrong» — how often we hear it). On the other hand, if we use the consensus principle, a sluggish decision-making can provoke an effect of delay. In this case no one will be responsible for the company's crash — it will be regarded as a bad destiny. It is necessary to mention that while creating management algorithms it is important to determine the management concepts accepted in the company. I mean that one staff member can understand something well, while for another one it may be not so apparent.
 
All the three principles are usually applied in state management. Consensus principle is used by legislative bodies or consultative («we keep discussing until we find the truth»). The principle of compromise is used by executive bodies (carry out our orders, and we will pay your wages, and later and pension). Authoritarizm is used in church, where the true is undisputable and subject to obligatory execution («do not kill, do not steal, do not be vulgar, etc.»). All these directions should naturally exist in a certain balance, otherwise there will occur different kinds of dictatorships and burn the fires with heretics, and the democracy (or parity relations between the authorities) will remain a dream.