Using the Information

The results of the VTCON program are given in three parts: (1) a list of the primary clusters with their component Functions, (2) a compilation of links within these clusters and links between clusters as they are revealed in condensing clusters at succeedingly higher levels of the hierarchy, and (3) the Information
Structure, a listing of the hierarchy giving the clusters at each level by code name (e.g, 302, meaning “level 3, cluster 2”) with their next-lower-level component clusters. This information enables the Functions, Design Factors and Solution Elements to be brought together for optimal support of the ensuing processes of synthesis.

Several means for synthesis have been developed in Structured Planning. Each has certain strengths, and combinations are possible.

The technique used for this project reconstructs a traditional idea-generating process, Means/Ends Analysis, as two complementary processes: Means/Ends Analysis and Ends/Means Synthesis. To begin, a cluster of workable size is selected from the Information Structure and transferred as structure (subcluster numbers and membership information) and Functions (list) to a Means/Ends form (Figure 16).

The task of Means/Ends Analysis is to create labels for all clusters. Moving from left to right through the subclusters, the question is asked, “To what end are these Functions means?” The answer is purpose expressed in the format for an Activity or, at higher levels, a Mode or Submode of operation.

When the wording of all the labels has been fine-tuned in the context of a completely labeled Information Structure (see a partial example in Figure 17), clusters are subjected to Ends/Means Synthesis. In this process, just the opposite activity occurs. Where the essence of the Means/Ends Analysis was the “discovery” of purpose seen freshly, the essence of the Ends/Means Synthesis is the “invention” of concepts to accomplish these purposes. In Figure 18, the same cluster given labels in Figure 16 is now re-examined as a challenge for invention. The highest level “purpose” is treated as the ultimate end to be reached, and the question is asked, “What means would meet this end?” New means are then generated left to right, increasing in specificity as preceding means are treated as new ends. Much as Design Strategies are treated in Design Factor documents, means are best stated as imperative verb-phrase “strategies”. When ideas for means become specific enough to be final Elements of the solution package, they are given evocative noun-phrase titles (as Solution Elements were) and status as System Elements.

Labels given for subclusters at intermediate levels in the Means/Ends Analysis of the chosen cluster are checked for coverage as the Ends/Means Synthesis progresses, and Solution Elements originally conceived for the Functions involved are constantly reviewed as possible end products. New ideas, however, are encouraged, and original ideas may be modified or combined in the light of the ends/means that evolve.

What remains is to describe the properties and features of the System Elements, ensure that there are ideas to fulfill all the Functions, and consider the System Elements against each other to draw out all systemic properties that can be gained. For the first of these tasks, the team begins to fill out what will become a System Element form (Figure 21). Although this task will have to be addressed later for completion, it is usually best to collect properties and features for an idea at the time the idea develops. Elaborations can be made at any time – if something has been recorded to elaborate upon.

The second task, checking features against required Functions, is accomplished on a tabular form, shown in Figure 19. Features are evaluated here for their contribution to fulfilling the Functions present in the primary clusters of that part of the Information Structure being addressed in the Ends/Means process. If a feature contributes significantly to fulfilling a Function, the feature/Function cell is marked boldly; if there is some contribution, the cell is marked, but less boldly. In practice, a three-option decision scheme (significant contribution, some, none) works well. A special value of this activity is that, in the process of considering how a feature of an idea may help to fulfill a Function, the thought process about how that specific fulfillment occurs often helps to crystallize the nature of the feature and the properties that generate it. Additional features may also occur to the team at this time and, of course, if there are Functions for which there are no System Elements, this is the signal to return to the Ends/Means process for more work.

Finally, the third task pits System Element against System Element in a search for additional synergies that can contribute to systemic qualities. At this stage, although the Ends/Means process is complete, it is still possible to mold System Element properties and features in ways to optimize system functionality. Figure 20 shows a form used to consider System Elements four at a time against four others. The boxes in the form are used to note ways in which the pair of System Elements can work together. Rather than simply recognizing relationships, the planning team proactively seeks out ways for the System Elements to work together – to the extent of modifying one or the other, or both, to create synergy. Any changes are incorporated in the properties and/or features of the individual System Elements. At this stage of the synthesis process, when the system is at a high level of description and the team knows more about it than it ever has, it is the best possible time to extend ideas to higher levels of cooperation. The systematic consideration of relationships is a powerful creative tool.

The organization provided by the Information Structure and the synthesis support processes for using it give the planning team the bird’s eye views they need of the problem. Information is juxtaposed insightfully with effectiveness well beyond the capability of conventional information retrieval systems. The effect is having at hand not only what you need to know, but also what you didn’t know you needed to know!