Wed, May 13, 2009




Imagining the Future of Leadership and/or Leading the Imagining of the Future


Edited/Interpreted by JRH (3-12-9/4-4-9) from
TRIBAL LEADERSHIP by Logan, King, and Fischer-Wright
retrieved on 4-4-9 from
THE THREE LAWS OF PERFORMANCE by Steve Zaffron and Dave Logan
retrieved on 3-12-9 from the blog of Michael F. Martin, February 16, 2009, at

Tribal Leadership presents the thesis that the health of organizations correlates with growth in the average number of connections between members of the organization over time.
“Every company, indeed, every organization, is a tribe, or if it’s large enough, a network of tribes—groups of twenty to 150 people in which everyone knows everyone else, or at least knows of everyone else. Tribes are more powerful than teams, companies, or even CEOs, and yet their key leverage points have not been mapped—until now.

In a rigorous ten-year study of approximately 24,000 people in more than two dozen corporations, Logan, King, and Fischer-Wright refine and define a common theme: the success of a company depends on its tribes, the strength of its tribes is determined by the tribal culture, and a thriving corporate culture can be established by an effective tribal leader.

Tribal Leadership shows leaders how to assess their organization’s tribal culture on a scale from one to five and then implement specific tools to elevate the stage to the next.”

The Three Laws of Performance provides a list of rules (and stories explaining how they work in practice) that promise to help individuals in leadership roles facilitate the group coherence and cohesion that are necessary to bring about transcendent performance.

“The power in this book stems from using the Three Laws of Performance. A law isn’t a rule, tip, or step, but distinguishes the moving parts at play behind an observable phenomenon. A law is invariable. Whether you believe in gravity or not doesn’t lessen its effect on you.
The greatest advances in history have come from applying newly discovered laws. Think of Newton’s three laws of physics. Each on its own is interesting and insightful, and when combined together and applied, they become powerful and predictive.
When the Three Laws in this book are applied, performance transforms to a level far beyond what most people think is possible. It doesn’t happen bit by bit, but all at once, as individuals and organizations rewrite their future.” Retrieved on 3-12-9 from

Both of these books promote a systems model for explaining individual and group performance. According to the systems model, there is no particular habit or activity that will guarantee an individual who practices it better performance or more creativity. The reason for this is that whereas an individual produces the performance or creative work, the work must then be evaluated and accepted by the field of experts for the symbolic domain of the performance before it can become a part of that domain. In other words, transcendent performances (including creative works and the accomplishment of challenging business goals) require collaboration between individuals and groups. Growth (or decay) results as groups and the individuals who constitute them evolve to tackle successively more complex goals.

The First Law Of Performance holds that how people perform correlates to how situations “occur” to them.
So what exactly does occur mean? We mean something beyond perception and subjective experience. We mean the reality that arises within and from your perspective on the situation. In fact, your perspective is itself part of the way in which the world occurs to you. “How a situation occurs” includes your view of the past (why things are the way they are) and the future (where all this is going).”

Roger Penrose’s Road to Reality:


This image from Penrose recalls the Triad of C. S. Pierce, a core structure of the AutoGnome(TM) and a precursor of the MultiCoRelational Systems of J. R. Hamann emphasizing the
TriRelational Form


in Synthesizing Mind as the Pre-eminent First of the The 7SYNs: Strategic Viewpoints of Possible Relational Futures {Re-Creating the Universe Virtually}: see


[The use of circles and lines in this drawing represent systems and relations, respectively, whereas the oblong figure can represent either]
So should seeing things this way make any difference in how we act?
The answer is yes because as Werner Erhard knew well, it is possible to change the loop by convincing individuals to change how they understand their past and forecast their future, especially as it relates to others within the group. As the Author’s Note makes clear, part of the intellectual history of this book is derived from the knowledge and experience of people who worked with Erhard in the est seminars popular several decades ago. Incidentally, that inheritance might also explain the willingness to leave some terminology inscrutable. Part of the ethics of est seems to have involved challenging the audience to engage with the teaching intellectually — a practice best exemplified by Socrates and worst exemplified by Heidegger, both of whom might also be considered antecedents to this sort of philosophy.
The remaining two laws basically spell out a prescription for how to implement transformational change within an organization given that the systems model applies.

The Second Law Of Performance holds that “how a situation occurs arises in language.”
This is the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, which is now an accepted fact at least among cognitive psychologists.

The Third Law Of Performance holds that “future based language transforms how situations occur to people.”
In other words, when enough individuals working within a domain decide to change the domain, then the domain and hence the activities of the individuals and groups that constitute it will shift into a different mode of operating. What is perhaps less intuitive is the fact that such shifts may occur voluntarily when enough individuals agree to make them happen. That’s another reason why this book should be read in conjunction with Tribal Leadership.

ENVISIONING LEADERSHIP: Imagining the Future of Leadership and/or Leading the Imagining of the Future
The foregoing laws might be summarized simply as follows: The 1st – “How a situation occurs” assumes a TriRelational Form; The 2nd – The Form is a TriRelational Semiotic (language) System; The 3rd – A TriRelational Semiotic Envisioning Act Transforms “How a situation occurs” in the 1st Law.

The Mission is to form an environment in which an Envisioning Act might Transform “How a situation occurs” as an enabling act for individuals to personally recognize how to Envision Leadership in Intelligizing the Three Laws of Performance through the VirtualMind (IntelliSite) Development Hierarchy as per the following:


Continue reading...

Making A Mark

Mon, Apr 20, 2009



“You Can’t Direct the Wind but You Can Adjust the Sails”

German Proverb


R.Elated. Personal Experience Is The Existence Of Relational Systems. By Presumption, This Is The Essence Of Existence (Nonexistence) Beyond The Personal. From this foundation along with the presumption of the notions of Subsumption (implying Distinction) and Image (implying Sign), MultiCoRelationalism was formed in 1963. As a derivative thereof, the form of a theory of theory formation with an inherent FORM requiring Order, DisOrder and ReOrdering MutiCoRelations was promulgated as a candidate for a Theory of Mind and its technological instantiation as Synthetic Mind, now referred to collectively as AG/Gnosteks with the product being the AutoGnome.


By trans(re)lating the substance of the following book into MultiCoRelational form, one has a rudimentary map for guiding the formulation and application of AG/Gnosteks.

Laws of Form (LoF) is a book by George Spencer-Brown, published in 1969, that straddles the boundary between mathematics and philosophy. The mathematics fills only about 55pp, but its prose is mystical, declamatory and paradoxical. Spencer-Brown was influenced by Wittgenstein, R. D. Laing, Charles Sanders Peirce, Bertrand Russell, and Alfred North Whitehead. Ostensibly a work of formal mathematics and philosophy, embodying an enigmatic “mathematics of consciousness,” its algebraic symbolism captured an (perhaps even the) implicit root of cognition: the ability to distinguish. [Edited by JRH (perhaps beyond recognition) from text retrieved 2/17/9 at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_Form#cite_note-5 ]

Beginning with the Void (i.e. No-Thing real or signatory), LoF directs one to MAKE (Draw) A MARK (Sign) (of distinction). With this act, a Universe is created (“In the beginning was the word (sign)”). LAWS OF FORM (LOF designating the movement evolving from the book, LoF ) reveals striking connections among logic, mathematics, the foundations of science and the philosophy of language and Mind, indeed of the “origin”, nature and evolution of the Universe. From the most fundamental foundations notions to the most intricate application, this MultiCoRelational re-vision of Humanity’s World View is without historical precedent or current competitors.


Despite the uniqueness and novelty, as suggested above, engendered by this MultiCoRelational foundation for our AutoGnomic products (generally realized as an IntelliSite incorporating a Search Engine coupled to a TriCoRelational Data Storage Engine (Phaneron)) and recognizing our empathic synergy with the philosophy of discovery as expressed by Spencer-Brown (see the following page) as regards our Research, Technology and Product Development, it seems paradoxical that our marketing focus should be largely confined to the zero-sum game of capturing market share against the competition in a fixed level consumer-resource economy.

WHAT IF we were to begin with a Market Void and MAKE A MARK (of distinction) thus creating our own Consumer-Universe via the added value of the creative/productive acts of each human by way of their enhanced performance due to the uploading of Ai3’s Synthetic Intelligence/Mind. WHAT IF we had 7 billion potential partners/consumers and were the sole provider of the products/services!

The following quotation is taken from Appendix 1 to the


“Discoveries of any great moment in mathematics and other disciplines, once they are discovered, are seen to be extremely simple and obvious, and make everybody, including their discoverer, appear foolish for not having discovered them before. It is all too often forgotten that the ancient symbol for the prenascence of the world is a fool, and that foolishness, being a divine state, is not a condition to be either proud or ashamed of.

Unfortunately, we find systems of education today which have departed so far from the plain truth, that they now teach us to be proud of what we know and ashamed of ignorance. This is doubly corrupt. It is corrupt not only because pride is in itself a mortal sin, but also because to teach pride in knowledge is to put up an effective barrier against any advance upon what is already known, since it makes one ashamed to look beyond the bonds imposed by one’s ignorance.

To any person prepared to enter with respect into the realm of his great and universal ignorance, the secrets of being will eventually unfold, and they will do so in measure according to his freedom from natural and indoctrinated shame in his respect of their revelation.

In the face of the strong, and indeed violent, social pressures against it, few people have been prepared to take this simple and satisfying course towards sanity. And in a society where a prominent psychiatrist can advertise that given the chance, he would have treated Newton to electric shock therapy, who can blame any person for being afraid to do so?

To arrive at the simplest truth, as Newton knew and practiced, requires years of contemplation [R.Elated-ed. Note–focusing of attention]. Not activity. Not reasoning. Not calculating. Not busy behaviour of any kind. Not reading. Not talking. Not making an effort. Not thinking. Simply bearing in MIND what it is one needs to know. And yet those with the courage to tread this path to real discovery are not only offered practically no guidance on how to do so, they are actively discouraged and have to set about it in secret, pretending meanwhile to be diligently engaged in the frantic diversions and to conform with the deadening personal opinions which are being continually thrust upon them.

In these circumstances, the discoveries that any person is able to undertake represent the places where, in the face of induced psychosis, he has by his own faltering and unaided efforts, returned to sanity. Painfully, and even dangerously, maybe. But nonetheless returned, however furtively.”

Continue reading...
Older Entries Newer Entries