Be on the move – step by step

Be on the move – step by step

 

God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
the courage to change the things I can,
and the wisdom to know the difference.

 

Miroslav S v í t e k

Ladislav Ž á k

 

 

Abstracts:

In publishing Paths of Complexity [1], we showed that the concept of aiming for certain fixed goals that can be stipulated is reserved for technological rather than social systems. While in the world of technology we refer to the optimum and its confidence band, in the world of humans the area of acceptability is more appropriate for dealing with a specific situation. This expresses the degree of confomity achieved by the aggregation of interests of actors, interest holders or stakeholders in relation to a given situation.

As a continuation of our discussion, we will focus on the comprehensive understanding of the concept of the situation and the resulting further possible procedures. This represents the first step into the Kauffmanian nearest future [2]. On the other hand, the handling of the situation should lead to the fact that the previous step was the last in a series of steps and we found ourselves at some kind of point from which the following steps would no longer lead to a "better one". Identifying this position, which is a kind of temporary optimum or equilibrium, is key to the overall success on the path of complexity, as well as a solution to the situation at hand.

1. Introduction

The first steps in the world of complexity reminds us of a passage across a river on ice floes drifting on different tides. The decision to take a step on a floating floe is an indication of an interest in getting to the other bank, but there is no easy way to determine how to get there. It can lead us into a situation where there is no reasonable step other than to return to the bank from which we came. However, we have other options, one of which is to continue further down the riverbank or to settle and wait for an improvement in conditions. Our ambition is to try to describe motion on indeterminate paths and to find the next step in each individual situation we find ourselves in.

The wanderer is like a chess player who must make another move from every position, but the situation in practice is much more complex. The chess player doesn't have to look for the move that brought him to this specific position, because it was simply the opponent's move. But what is similar to chess in real life is the attempt to understand the situation in which we find ourselves. Human understanding is always more important than computer analysis, which is not to say that technology is not useful. Once again, parallels are drawn with the game of chess, which has changed significantly over several decades thanks to the complicity of technology. Today, there is no point in playing chess against a computer that always wins. What is a great challenge, however, is when each of the players can use a computer - then the positions are equalised and there is a battle between two human beings with natural intellect assisted by artificial intelligence.

Similarly, technology can contribute to the evaluation of life situations in which our sometimes overly emotional approach can be corrected. This is even more important because people make decisions in a dual role in every situation in life. They are both the subjects and the objects of the situation, and this intersubjectivity necessarily constrains them in their search for the right course of action. Man can never gain the necessary distance when making decisions. Technology, on the other hand, has a natural remoteness and offers alternatives that may not be right, but can at least be useful.

2. Map of interests

The roles of artificial and natural intelligence are intertwined in the analysis of the situation. We as humans are unable to navigate online in a situation where there are too many actors, whether known or unknown. The vast majority of us can communicate with only a few dozen people, and for other interactions we already create all sorts of social institutions - from the mayor to the teacher, the doctor, the pharmacist, and finally the gravedigger. And we're talking only about well-known actors - close or more distant neighbours. The number of relationships that we can manage by ourselves is called Dunbar's number [15] and ranges somewhere around fifty.

For simplicity, imagine N actors, where each can have a positive (writing the number 1) or negative (writing 0) perception of a given situation. Combinatorics implies that we have 2N possible sets of views on a given situation. If we start to compare their mutual acceptability, i.e. to look for binary links between the solutions (if they are consistent, 1 applies, if not, 0 applies), we reach the number of  possibilities [5]. In the case of two actors, we get 4 possible combinations and 16 possibilities of their mutual relations. If we assume three actors, we get 8 combinations and 256 possible relationships. This reasoning shows how complex the task is when in real life we work with dozens of actors and their multidimensional rational-emotional views of the situation.

In the journey of complexity, we are exposed to the necessity of managing situations in which we also have a number of "unknown" actors. The only way to improve our knowledge is to consistently look for these actors and, if possible, to interact with them. Today it is fashionable to call these actors stakeholders, i.e. interest holders. Thus, we can in a way abstract from specific actors and focus only on the map of their interests.

The map of interests has the advantage that it is easier to achieve the desired distance when creating it, because people, including the map makers, are represented by their interests but do not feature directly in the map. In addition, retrospectively, individual persons cannot be traced behind the aggregated interests. One promoter may carry multiple interests and multiple promoters may represent one common interest.

Creating the resultant map of interests in real time is impossible in the scope of human brain capacity. Artificial intelligence can do it better than humans, but in real situations it must work with aggregates, represented by sparse matrices of relationships. Advanced algorithms can indicate the places where the presence of a previously unknown stakeholder is inevitable and even estimate and describe its future interest. This is similar to the principle that made it feasible to predict the properties of previously undiscovered features thanks to Mendeleev's table.

To address a specific stakeholder and interact with him is already the domain of natural intelligence, which unfortunately is not yet objectively able to maintain control over the procedures of artificial intelligence. For this reason, verifying the results achieved through conventional procedures is too time-consuming. Artificial intelligence, like anything around us, can turn into a tool of manipulation. Let us recall in this context the chess machine of the Bratislava-born Wolfgang von Kempelen in the second half of the 18th century. It was a Turk's figurine with a chessboard. It was a fraud because the mechanism was operated from the inside by the best players of the time. However, combined with Kempelen's reputation as a polyhistor and engineering genius, this was sufficient for the "Turk" to defeat major personalities for nearly a century, including Napoleon Bonaparte and Benjamin Franklin. The Turk even survived Kempelen, had several other owners, and was only exposed as a swindle in the American press in the second half of the 19th century.

After this historical excursus, let us imagine the possibilities of contemporary artificial intelligence, which can be blamed for literally anything, because of its reputation as something more perfect than a human being. Something along the lines of, oops that wasn't us, that was done by the computer... An example of this is the conduct of the management of courier services, which often make unreasonable demands on the driver and justify themselves by saying that the itinerary was drawn up by artificial intelligence. If the driver rebels, he or she is usually fired and replaced by another one of the many others waiting, without anyone being able to find out whether the AI has designed anything at all, or even whether it even operates in the company.

On a completely different note, some foreign public schools have banned teachers and students from using ChatGPT because they fear that its powerful artificial intelligence will lead to a tsunami of cheats. A number of schools have already blocked access to this software on their servers. Unfortunately, it is not possible to control what students use on their computers at home. Bans, typically imposed by the education system, are doomed to failure. It seems that it will be the influence of artificial intelligence that will change education in favour of the principles of a healthy natural rational approach in the method of Jan Amos Comenius’ ideas.

In third place, we are offered a picture of a tennis match arbitrated by artificial intelligence based on information using hawk's eye. While the players often argue hysterically with the linesmen, the AI's machine-voiced statements are humbly accepted. Yet no one is able to tell what the reality is. A machine just said it and it's out of the question. No one asks if the system has been "accidentally" tampered with.

3. Interest holders

Behind every interest there is necessarily a promoter. This can take many forms. It may be an individual, a corporation of various types, but we may also find that a particular interest is backed by more or less numerous random groups of individuals or corporations whose members may not even know about each other. Only over time can they begin to aggregate and form all sorts of alliances, treaties, or gradually grow into a corporation.

3.1 Groups, corporations, alliances

When we talk about groups and corporations, they are basically of two types. Firstly, they are special purpose corporations, which are formed to promote an interest, characterised by the fact that their purpose and essence lie outside themselves. Whoever would like an illustration of a great organization whose purpose lies outside it, let him follow the history of military units from the squad to the entire army.

Simultaneously, alongside the single minded corporations, there are groups that we will call natural organisations. Their definition is that they arise from the will of their founders and operate on the basis of principles established by the founders without any determining external influence. Simply put, the greatest weakness of natural organizations is that each of the founding fathers, like each of us, is only human. Humans simply cannot be neutral and objective, both individually and as a group. It is a significant us-them dichotomy. There is a clear preference for family or in-group ties over other relationships.

These are cultural universalisms, which include, among other things, that as humans we are genetically predisposed to superior and violent behavior and tend to self-promote, even at the cost of cheating. We are endowed with reason but also with irrationality, we have a conscious and subconscious mind, and this cocktail of the human soul contains moral sensibility and behaviour as an important extra ingredient. This strange mixture is inherited in various combinations, creating in each generation a new sense of inequality, injustice and different perceptions of social barriers and limits.

As soon as the group is larger than about a hundred people, but often much smaller, the standard reciprocity of behaviour cannot be maintained, and swindlers of all kinds begin to assert themselves and the group begins to need a specialised repressive apparatus. Moreover, as the number of individuals grows above one hundred,[15] their natural trust in each other and in the group quickly collapses and a tendency to replace the natural trust with an institutional one emerges. Purposeful institutions are being created, but they have their shortcomings. Then there remains that question from Iuvenalis' Satires: "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes...?!", i.e., who guards the guards themselves...?

Another issue is the general prevalence of stupidity in groups and the resulting behaviour called groupthink, which allows individuals and entire groups to cut themselves off from reality and build their own virtual worlds in very strange but quite describable ways, such as self-deception, propaganda, distortion and even obedience.

The systematic alliances [14] are formed by the accidental encounter of two or more systems and persist in mutual (synergistic) coexistence for a certain period of time. Synergetics is perceived as the discipline of cooperation, interaction or synergy of parts of systems within the system, both in a positive and negative sense. The membership of the constituents in an alliance is usually dynamic. The holistic goals of the alliance, if they exist, arise emergently and are realized through the behaviour of the constituents.

In practice, we have experienced cases where individual organisations act in concert even when they do not communicate with each other. Forms of alliances include even informal organizational structures that consider who is a former classmate of whom, who goes on holiday with whom, etc. It is often the case that these informal structures have greater significance than the formal ones.

3.2 Team collaboration

In the real world, the main players are not only individuals, but also teams, ranging from companies to hobby groups, music orchestras to collective sports. Achieving collective results requires the coordination and interplay of the partial activities of all team members. We have all seen situations where even a team that was not expected to achieve anything ended up excelling because each team member truly put his heart into the game, creating a collective shared emotion. All the players got high and intuitively dealt with the arising situations as one complex organism.

We can learn from sports coaches [9] how to approach creating a collaborative team culture and how to achieve better results with these teams using "collective intelligence", where the overall performance of the team is not just the simple aggregate of the performance of individual players, but where the culture of relationships (the team ecosystem) takes the performance to a much higher, more sustainable and robust or resilient level.

Let's list a few principles that must be shared by all players on the team:

1. Shared goals - a consensus among the players about what they want to achieve as a team and an authentic mental identification of all players with the identified goals.
2. Mutual trust - a key personal bond of open-mindedness to other team members without major internal reservations, based on their trustworthiness.
3. Common rules - agreement over adherence to written but mainly unwritten agreements within the team, the so-called team contract.
4. Role assignment - assigning responsibilities for a portion of team activities in order to optimally collaborate on performance.
5. Talent development - utilizing specific individual player abilities for overall team success.
6. Motivation - creating and developing a "personal intrinsic reward" for players for individual performance in the team, which can be tangible, but more often of a very non-material nature.
7. Continuous improvement and learning from the successes and mistakes of our own as well as those of others.
8. Integration of newcomers - good management of the integration of new players into the team, especially their alignment with the existing team ecosystem.
9. Performance management - continuously monitoring the performance of individual players and placing them in the game according to their current fitness, game development or external conditions.

While the first three principles will only create a solidarity group among the players, the next three guidelines already characterize a well-performing team. The last three principles capture the ingredients of a great dream team, but however, it is true that you can't get to the next level without successfully mastering the previous ones.

An optimal team can be defined in such a way that each additional member is already redundant and reduces its effectiveness, just as each missing member diminishes its capability and resilience. Of course, the optimum in any organization must be much broader, and it is wise to create a certain "reliability bandwidth" and to remember that even the best teams have substitutes, or even an entire B-team.

4. "Situation" analysis

The basic concept of the systems approach is the "environment" that defines everything that surrounds us and of which we ourselves are a part - the objective model. At the same time, we have the possibility of autonomous actions – the subjective model, implemented within this environment, thus influencing and shaping it in a retroactive way. It is true that nothing is greater than its environment, everything is a part of its environment and the environment is an arrangement of imbalances. We can declare as imbalances everything that creates the possibility of change in the environment, which occurs under specific conditions, known or unknown to the holders of interests. For situations, the above-mentioned interests are typical representatives of imbalances.

The indicative map of the environment includes, in a first approximation, an arrangement of imbalances, where the "environment" has three contents: spatiotemporal (L), energetic (E) and informational (I). The simplest definition of polarity is external and internal, where I am influenced by the environment or influence the environment myself; active and passive, where I invest energy in changing the environment or draw energy from the environment; known and unknown, where I gain knowledge from the environment or enrich it with my own.

Each change or event has its own agent (G), its own mode of implementation (M) and its own potential for gain/loss (P). Interests are controlling and controlled. Their relationship is mediated by the distribution and redistribution of interests, which again have their (L, E, I) and (G, M, P) components.

The basis of the general interests of the people is to strive for the better through the path of least resistance. The problem with this definition is the non-specific notion of "better". A slightly more particular definition includes components of the better such as justice, security and the possibility of triple reproduction, biological, socio-economic and spiritual. Good governance or good government is also supposed to have similar components, where the degree of understanding of the situation and the quality of the subsequent actions are the natural basis at various levels of social organization.

The situation in the socio-economic sense is a tool for satisfying the needs or interests of which we are the bearers. Both basic ones, necessary for survival or continuance, or derived ones, i.e. to satisfy what we can call desires. Situations carry a personal substrate in the form of individual interest-bearers who co-create diverse alliances, consortia, corporations, interest associations, etc. Sometimes the basis of these relationships is trust between the persons who form them, as well as trust in persons in their external environment, but sometimes a "mere" common interest is sufficient. The form of trust in any community is a function of the trustworthiness of its members, i.e. an authentic product of each individual's personality, which may be real or false. Credibility distinguishes the entrepreneur from the impostor.

For a better understanding and overall insight into the situation, it is important to find an interest that can be described as key or top priority. This is, for example, the sovereign interest of a natural organisation that is no longer controlled by another interest. It is equally important to know that a core interest must exist whenever the situation appears to be workable. Keep in mind that there is always the possibility of adding such an element to a situation that seems dysfunctional. It is a complex process that requires a great deal of knowledge and experience. However, there are many examples, especially from ecosystem restoration, but also from social practice, which testify to the beneficial effect of inserting such a missing element.

4.1 Cube model of the "situation"

There are three basic characteristics of the situation [12]. The first is that everything has its place and time, the second is that everything has its potentiality, its ability to shape its environment, and the third is that everything has its degree of cognizability

If we are dealing with the first property, then the fact that a thing or phenomenon has its place and its time can be expressed, for example, by the fact that it is graspable, has its dimensions, shape, size, weight, time of existence - simply, that it is somewhere, sometime and even somehow looks. As for the second property, then under the word potentiality or the ability to change its environment one can understand the degree of influence, movement or stillness, activity or passivity, heat or cold. Under the third quality, the degree of cognizability, one can see not only the interface of the known and the unknown or even the knowable and the unknowable, but also such simple everyday pairs as the public and the private, the visible and the invisible, the apparent and the hidden.

As a basic pair related to a thing or phenomenon within the first property, let us define the pair internal and external. Within the second property, the most general pair appears to be active and passive. The third property decomposes most naturally into the pair known and unknown.

It seems trivial, but it is important to keep in mind that every situation may have stakeholders and interests that we know nothing at all about. There are also complex general analyses where we accept that some objects and phenomena are currently and prospectively or even completely objectively unknowable to us, and yet we must take them into account.

 

Fig. 1 General cubic model of the "situation"

In this way, each holder of interest or interest itself can be described by a 2x2x2 "cube model", composed of 8 octants, each of which is determined by just one triple combination of pairs of basic qualities. We therefore get a segment containing that part of the thing or phenomenon which is characterized as internal, active and known, and with it subsequent segments characterized as internal, active and unknown; internal, passive and known; internal, passive and unknown. This is followed by the segments external, active and known; external, active and unknown; external, passive and known; and external, passive and unknown.

The question remains as to what and how to relate these qualities in a particular situation. In the first case, we are only interested in the characteristics of the situation currently under study, including the stakeholders and their interests. The second option allows us to analyse the basic building blocks of a given subject or phenomenon. For example, in socio-economic processes it is persons and their relationships, in biological processes it is cells and their integration into organisms, in physical systems it is fundamental particles and their interactions. We can then inquire directly into the properties of these building blocks and thus move deeper within a given subject or phenomenon.

We can think of each element of a subject or phenomenon as a complete cubic model with eight octants having the same properties as the original model, and we can continue the analysis in eight different inward directions until we hit some objective threshold. Similarly, we can think of the initial cubic model as one of the octants of the parent cubic model that is closest to the larger one and continue the analysis outwards, again in eight different directions until we reach some objective threshold.

This leads to a phenomenon known as self-similarity leading to fractal geometry [4]. Thus, the cubic model of the situation has a fractal form, which allows to explore and modelling the situation at different levels of resolution, and to perform concretization and generalization at different layers. In practice, it has proven useful to always complement the cubic model of the basic level N with models of a higher level (N+1) and a lower level (N-1).

 

Fig. 2 Embedding and generalisation of the cubic model

When it comes to the information content or degree of cognizability of a situation, it is natural that we analyze issues and phenomena based on what is already known about them. The cubic model only encourages us to consider those parts of the observed things and phenomena that for some reason remain hidden from us. It is prudent to assume that every situation has a similarly large part behind the horizon of our knowledge as well as in front of it.

A situation in which common sense cannot be found is very difficult to grasp and, in some ways, difficult, even dangerous, for its stakeholders and their interests. The Czech language overuses the term “the sound mind of a peasant”, but it is a well-known common sense, about which Hannah Arendt, Clifford Geertz or Thomas Paine have written excellent works. Common sense is, among other things, a guarantee that society will not disintegrate into mutually incompatible alternative worlds.

For better demonstration, we show in Fig. 3 the form of a cubic model whose octants do not have sharp boundaries. Clearly, the subdivision of the individual basic properties can be much finer to produce a continuous scale of intensity for a given property. In this limiting form, to give a better idea, this is the cubic RYB (red, yellow, blue) model used by artists for mixing primary colours, where each point in space represents one triplet of primary colours and has its own unique colour hue.

 

Fig. 3 Various transition intensities in the cubic model

The RYB model is similarly rich as our environment, as are the situations that arise in it and the solutions to which we are faced in life. The cubic model allows us to better navigate in each situation accompanied by changes in the environment. In the general perception of the situation, it is primarily the dimension of time, where, in accordance with the wisdom of King Solomon, we know that everything will eventually pass. Of course, this is applicable to any situation.

4.2 Domino "situation" model

When examining the situation in detail, a domino model emerges, because any stakeholder is a natural converter of its inputs into outputs. Let us denote by T₀ the stakeholder through which we perceive the situation. Around T₀ there are other stakeholders with their own interests and relationships, which we denote as T₁ to T_n . Each T_i has its inputs I_i,(1…p) and outputs E_i,(1…q) and can be connected, like dominoes, wherever the output of one T_i connects to the input of the next T_j.

For simplicity, we can think of the situation as a set of dominoes representing T₁ to T_n. It applies that stakeholders are connected to the inputs and outputs of the other stakeholders. The inputs and outputs on each cube are not interchangeable because the transformation processes of inputs to outputs are irreversible. In economic theory, such linkages are called supplier-customer relationships. Each stakeholder T_i can have several forms of linkages, for example, liquidating, viable, developing or predatory. Further, the characteristics of the linkages may be real, possible or impossible.

T₀ has its own inputs and outputs which are connected to some of the inputs and outputs of T₁ to T_n. T₀ performs the transformation of inputs to outputs using an internal capacitance transformation matrix K. Since each element of this matrix transforms the inputs I_0,(1…p)into outputs E_0,(1…q), we can define the partial transformation capacities as K_pq, whose values may mutually interact in a nonlinear manner.

 

 

Fig. 4 Domino model

If we consider the domino model of the situation (Figure 4), we see that there are several possible groups of future moves. The first group of actions is to change the form, quality or quantity, of the transformation matrix with already connected objects. In the second group of steps, the objects T_(1…m can be analysed and newly connected to on the input or output side. In general, increasing the stability of the situation by managing to involve T₀ in closed cyclic chains consisting mainly of doubles (T_0E-T_xI,T_xE-T_0I), triples (T_0E-T_xI, T_xE-T_yI, T_yE-T_0I) or in general n-tuples can be considered as advantageous interconnections.

Another possible step to increase T₀'s attractiveness is to seek a direct link with a strategic T_S, which may involve certain risks for T₀ associated with the undue influence of a strong partner that may unduly control T₀.

 

Fig. 5 Cycles of doubles and triples of the Domino model

The domino model points to long-term activities that the T₀ should systematically perform regardless of the specific situation. It is the recognition of one's own environment, i.e., the foreign T_i, their possible potential, but also the exploration of the possibilities of changing one's own capacity matrix K. In a complex situation, the help of artificial intelligence can offer solutions that humans alone would find very difficult to achieve.

5. Imbalances in the environment

Both experience and scientific knowledge tell us that we perceive our environment through its changes, i.e. differences among situations, to the extent that we can detect this information. Even fewer are the differences that we can evaluate and respond to.

Not all of the changes in the environment have the logical or causal link between them that is so desirable in the scientific world. Frequently we find only a few strong trajectories in the whole space of changes, which metaphorically speaking correspond to a particular chess game in the space of all possible game moves and positions. Henri Poincaré described this fact more than a century ago and introduced the concept of phase space.

5.1 Analysis of the changes

When assessing the situation, each stakeholder must distinguish between changes that occur independently and changes that are in any way related to the ongoing existence and development of the situation, including possible consequences.

It is beneficial for each interest holder to establish a reference boundary in the analysis, dividing the phase space of change into those that are taking place inside and outside the situation. Similarly, it is helpful to establish an imaginary boundary of what is known and unknown to each stakeholder. Finally, it is important to set the boundaries of what is passive or active change from a stakeholder's perspective. Individual stakeholders have no tools at their disposal in a particular situation other than shifting the dividing planes of the change phase space.

In the case of the first attribute, this means the reduction or, conversely, the increase of different types of boundaries between the external and internal environment of the organisation. For such action, especially in the case of formal boundaries, there must always be a certain space and time; it cannot be done at any time, but only in the convenient space-time called by the Greek philosophers horae. In this case, we will speak of the structural or organizational tools at the disposal of the interest holders to deal with the situation.

In the case of the second plane, lying between the known and the unknown environment, it is about gaining new knowledge about the current situation and its environment, or reassessing already acquired knowledge. In this way, individual stakeholders expand their memory and gain expertise with the help of new information. At the same time, they reduce the disorderliness of their environment. In principle, this process can be continuous, permanent and pervasive. It depends on the culture of the individual stakeholder to what extent they engage their human and technical cognitive potential to their advantage. Here we are talking about information or cognitive tools.

In the case of the third plane of differentiation between passive and active environment, it is a matter of mitigating potential gradients and unstable imbalances, which are the only possible source of energy, information and even substance flows in the environment. They can become a risk, a threat of extinction, but also a means and source of further development of the organisation. A possible way of harmonization is to complement these imbalances with various rectifiers, converters or accelerators, so that the flows compensating for the imbalances between the areas of activity and passivity take place to the benefit of the organization and do not endanger it. While this process of 'flow regulation' cannot be continuous, it should be highly standardised and responsibly consulted. We say that the stakeholder uses regulatory tools.

5.2 Dynamic balance – equilibrium

Dealing with the situation is about continuously mapping the balance and stability zone of the organisation in the vast field of possibilities offered by changes in the environment. It should be highlighted that these tools and measures are mutually reinforcing and closely interlinked. This raises the requirements for the organisational structure to enable these interventions to interact properly with each other.

The situation, due to the actions of individual stakeholders, is constantly interconnecting with its internal and external environment, i.e. with its surroundings and with itself and therefore harmonising its surrounding environment. In other words, it is about creating each stakeholder's subjective cognitive domain for a given situation through a wide range of interactions that originate both within the organization itself and in its environment. This process can be summarized under the term knowing-cognition and is closely linked to the process of self-creation i.e. autopoiesis. In practice, it is a set of structural, organisational and informational interventions that have the potential to send signals to the organisation's environment and to receive not only their responses, but also to increase the ability to perceive other signals coming from within the organisation's environment.

There's a way for the participating stakeholders to prevent the situation from falling apart in their hands. They are constantly searching for new possible forms, contents and meanings so that if an unmanageable change or series of changes occurs, the original situation can be modified with its meaning, content and form in an appropriate way.

The first sign may be stagnation and freezing of evolution. This is sometimes called organisational death, when the meaning of a given situation is preserved, partly even the form, but the content or better said the purpose is lost.  The second sign is the evolution that leads to turbulence and chaos. The situation becomes so disorganised that even reasonable steps lose their effectiveness. The purpose or content and partly the meaning remain, but the form is gone. The third type of development is associated with changes that define a state where the situation is preserved in its formal content or purpose but loses its original meaning. Sometimes a different meaning is found, for example, some factories become historical monuments.

It is, of course, possible to systematically prepare for possible devastating changes by creating ecosystems or alternative situations with distinct characteristics so that they can survive virtually any possible change with minimal losses.  This is a complex, costly, but possible solution. The question is the stakeholder response as to whether they will be receptive to such a game.

Stakeholders' approach to their own future is also crucial. It is about looking for the widest possible range of near-term possible futures, rather than building a clear longer-term vision of development that is based on just a few, or even a single, near-term premise. The aim should be that the above-mentioned "constant probing for equilibrium and a zone of stable and minimally predictable development of the situation in a vast field of possibilities" should take place at least to a large extent within the framework of the previously considered options.  Then there will be no complete groping in the dark when the only correct and predestined route turns out to be a blind one.

Preparing as much as possible for the immediate future should not, however, limit the creation of visions for the more distant future. If such a connection is found between the nearest future state and the relevant vision through causally interrelated purposes, then such a scenario can certainly be classified as possible. From this point of view, the interdependence and conditionality of the structural, informational and regulatory measures mentioned above with the interventions concerning form, content and purpose is evident.

5.3 Evaluation of changes

If we think about the key reasons for making the wrong decisions, we must conclude that the first reason is that the stakeholder does not identify the existing problem in time. Secondly, that they recognise the problem but do not acknowledge it; thirdly, that they acknowledge the problem but do not adopt any solutions; and only fourthly, that the reason is the wrong solutions themselves. From this reasoning, it can be seen that a substantial part of the wrong procedures comes from primary ignorance of the situation and only the rest originates from the failure to find the right strategy. For the sake of clarity, let us list three possible approaches to evaluating the situation.

The first approach is based on specific, interlocking images that are provided to stakeholders by individual changes or sequences of changes. As regards changes resulting in liquidation, these are those that fundamentally change the situation. The first approach is based on specific, interlocking images that are provided to stakeholders by individual changes or sequences of changes. As regards liquidating changes, these are those that fundamentally change the situation. From the observer's point of view, it seems as if the situation has begun to turn inside out in one or more directions. Another such effect is the accumulation of changes that lead to a significant predominance of one characteristic of the characteristics (G, M, P) over another. For the observer, there is either an excessive explosion or, on the contrary, an implosion of the horizon of the situation, an excessive stability or, on the contrary, instability of the environment, a feeling of constantly repeating routine or movement in a totally unfamiliar environment, in mystery. This is all a warning and must necessarily prompt appropriate stakeholder action, if such action is still feasible at all. Changes that are not liquidating, on the other hand, are those that represent less dramatic fluctuations in individual characteristics (G, M,P) and neither confusion nor accumulation and fatal predominance of the frequency of one characteristic over another.

The second approach to evaluating liquidating and non-liquidating changes is based on the form of their feedback. Changes can generally have negative or positive feedback. Negative feedback regulates the change and its effects and takes care of the stability of the environment or creates the necessary homeostasis. Examples of this are the action of spring mechanisms, natural and technical thermostats, or market equilibrium. Positive feedback, on the other hand, amplifies the effects of change and leads to uncontrollable outcomes. Examples are avalanche effects of all kinds. Apart from the classic avalanches, these include fires or the spread of panics, epidemics, but also the development of new markets, the spread of successful innovations, etc. Current systems theory, based on the findings of mathematics, philosophy, natural sciences and economics, does not have an effective and reliable tool for estimating whether a forthcoming change will have a negative or positive feedback. Even leading theorists are beginning to concede that such an estimate is not possible for complex systems. For individual stakeholders, this currently implies a single challenge: To have permanently prepared actions in case of the arrival of changes in the situation with positive feedback.

The third approach is based on the natural progression that takes place in every situation. As time goes on, situations become progressively more complex and their complexity increases. As part of this process, their social and organisational capital increases, and of course the cost of maintaining it also increases. The result of these efforts should be better organisation and distribution of labour, and hence more efficient use of input energy. While any one stakeholder can work towards this, the number of stakeholders and the diversity of their interests make these steps difficult to enforce. In fact, from a certain level of complexity onwards, the rationalisation, development and growth strategies of stakeholders start to fail and the hope of their usefulness in each situation starts to diminish. The complexity of the organisation continues to increase, and more and more energy must be spent on communication and dispute reconciliation between stakeholders.

5.4 Trickery and deception

So far, we have dealt with the direct confrontation of an individual or a team with the situation. How to be better prepared for it and what strategy to choose in order to achieve a reasonable outcome. However, targeted ambushes, deception, subterfuge, or hidden negative schemes can also be part of the opponent's strategy. This means that everything looks very different from the outside than it really is.

In the past, the best chess players have won against the computer by sacrificing valuable pieces, but at the same time stealthily preparing a well-thought-out strategy for the next stage of the game. The computer did not have the ability to correctly assess that a worse situation was being created for it, because it was only calculating the values of the pieces gained. Therefore, cognition cannot be limited to the rational component alone, but we must engage all human faculties, including intuition. Intuition is a hunch, an extrasensory perception, sometimes a gift from above, sometimes what experience brings us. Henri Poincaré left us a beautiful quote: With logic we test, with intuition we discover...

The question is whether we should not also consider hidden agendas when assessing the situation in order to balance the battle. In these considerations, the Tibetan proverb applies: Know a man and you will know the world. Everything positive and negative that we can imagine in human behaviour can be generalised to the situation at hand, except that rapid development is placing ever greater demands on the use of artificial intelligence, because our biological brains are not built for such complex problems.

6. Decision-making

We all know the well-known saying - you go so long with a jug for beer until the ear is ripped off.  Few words of wisdom better express the fact that despite all our efforts, we must necessarily reckon that sooner or later the situation will get out of hand. We should do our best so that we have as little of our own blame on it as possible

Creating a memory of the situation should be an important part of the decision-making process. Those with an interest should carefully monitor how the situation is projected externally and internally, find responses to its evolution in the environment, and keep careful records of this. The situation must not be anonymous at present or in retrospect.

6.1 Exchanges of interests

Stakeholders communicate with each other to promote their interests. One of the essentials of describing a situation is the sum of the exchanges of interests or values taking place in it, which can be observed through changes in the map of interests. The reason for the exchange is the imbalance between the current and possible state, which can be changed as quickly as possible through the exchange. An important type of imbalance is debt, as an agreement on the temporary inequality of the parties involved or because of fears of violence.

An exchange requires two values and at least one interest in each of them to be accomplished. More than one interest on the part of one value requires their aggregation through communication. The communication of two aggregated or individual interests, which either apply an existing exchange rule or create a new one, is a prerequisite for the exchange itself.

The two different interests needed for an exchange do not necessarily require the participation of two holders. There is a whole class of exchanges that take place within a single mind that can generate multiple ideas, plans for acquiring them, and associated willing. Their mutual exchange is a process leading to an individual decision.

In each ongoing situation, there is a perceptible state of another possible nearest-future state, which is composed of existing values, promises of future existence of values, and derivatives of these promises, which are offered through the will for feasible exchange for values existing within the current state. Accomplished exchanges between the current state and the next
the nearest-future state contributes to increasing complexity, as each nearest-future state brings an expansion in the number of possible exchanges. Each successive state of exchanges is therefore more complex than the previous one. It is a phenomenon that tends to grow beyond all limits and gives the illusion of unlimited development of the situation.

The problem with this illusive tendency is the increasing dissatisfaction of interests and, above all, the completely uneven distribution of motivation for the necessary exchange. While the network of interests and their links, as expressions of feasible exchanges, has no problem with growth due to the growth of production and knowledge, the creation of a total and partial sufficiency of will is the main obstacle to what is now called growth or progress.

It is far from being the case that the current network of values and their exchanges is no longer dominated by a network of individual wills. Will is no longer even present in the various aggregates imposed by force or manipulation. All values that are offered for feasible exchange in each situation must be accompanied by a present interest, however it has been created, and this interest must have its importance at a given moment. It is precisely because of the lack of interests representing values that the situation collapses.

In every process of growth and decline in complexity, there is a breaking point beyond which it is impossible to return to the original form of the organisation. Approaching this point is well signaled by a number of occurrences. It is therefore not a problem for stakeholders to intercept these signals and propose the necessary interventions, which consist primarily in changing the dynamic balance.

The complexity of the situation as a network of feasible but always partially unrealised exchanges that tend to grow gradually to the point of chaos. This process is accelerated under conditions of growth in the ratio between unrealised and realisable exchanges. A common procedure may be to simplify the situation through controlled collapse [6]. Such a strategy can be compared to a series of exchanges in chess, which significantly simplify the game position. Even an uncontrolled collapse is not a disaster, but it is more difficult to predict where the simplification of the situation will stop and what the consequences will be for individual stakeholders.

6.2 Orientation in the "situation"

Today, there is a demand for maps that we want to hold in our hands when we walk into the unknown. We forgot two things. A map is not a landscape, and it is questionable whether there can be a map of the unknown. Yet many of us are convinced that it is better to walk through Siberia with a map of Ukraine, because some map must be better than none.

Let us recall the fact that knowledge of the terrain or at least its model (map) was the key to Napoleon Bonaparte's military successes. Map requirements are a fixed part of all military textbooks, including Sun Tzu's The Art of War [3].   Master Sun, in his classic timeless work, in two books entitled On the Shapes of Landscapes and On the Nine Landscapes, distinguishes landscapes according to their shape into passable, inaccessible, forked, cramped, precipitous, vast, and then, according to the rules of warfare, into distracting, easy, disputable, open, passable, dangerous, impassable, closed, and deadly. All this two and a half millennia ago. This should be a memento for those who think that navigating a situation or a model of it, such as a map of interests, is something simple, one-dimensional, something that is easy. As Master Sun writes, it is Art with a capital A.

The model of the situation, environment or map of interests contains octants where energy and chaos meet wherever they are situated. They are there and we must accept their existence and learn to live with them. If we apply the situation model to the human individual, then we need to acknowledge that there is a part of each of us where chaos and energy meet and be alert when that part of ourselves tries to control us. It can be our dark side as well as our light side - their common problem is that they are difficult to manage.

When it comes to socio-economic life, there is experience that we often do not master the forces at work in these octants, and if we do, we rarely know why. Among other things, this is because we try to manage them with the tool, we bring from the world to which we are accustomed, in which there is a certain order, statistical methods and probability calculus. But the complex situation is not a Gaussian world, it is a Mandelbrot world [4], a non-linear, fractal world with huge and unexpected imbalances. In a Gaussian world, future developments can be predicted with high probability. In the Mandelbrot world, there is in principle only what we can call the nearest future, i.e. spaces that open up and are filled with reality. In a social and economic context, we witness the realization of interests, needs and desires that relentlessly fill every space that opens up before them, whether they succeed there or not.

Each situation represents a part of the environment where the controlling interest and the controlled interest are located, as well as the environment where the distribution and redistribution of the controlling interest reside. It can be seen that if we get the redistribution of the controlling interest into the octant environment where chaos and energy meet, then we can soon expect significant changes. We cannot control these parts of the environment, but we can try to isolate or compensate for them in an appropriate way. In practice, this means that we will not try to control or optimize this situation in any way. On the contrary, it is necessary to exist in different polarities, to balance different interests, and thus better keep the dynamic balance, the equilibrium, under control.

6.3 The role of knowledge

If the subject represented by his consciousness is part of the object represented by the outside world, he cannot draw logical conclusions about it, because he is himself in a schizophrenic situation - he is giving evidence of something of which he is himself a part and which he himself changes by his behaviour. In a simple form, we can quote the famous statement of the Cretan philosopher Epimenides: All Cretans are liars, which is analogous to the statement: I am a Cretan and therefore a liar. Once we believe that the one who utters this sentence is telling the truth, then we must accept the fact that he is a liar. And if he is a liar, then he means the opposite of what he says and is therefore telling the truth.

Kurt Gödel used formal logic to introduce the notion of incompleteness [10]: Every system, formed on the basis of axioms, contains propositions that are formally correct but cannot be proved or disproved by the rules of a given system. This principle brings us to the required distance. The goal of a good education is to create the right distance so that the system under investigation can be reasonably described at a sufficient level of discrimination. A large distance leads to erroneous simplifications, a small distance to a great deal of noise of detail and emotion associated with the closeness of the situation under study.

The key to coping with a particular situation is the degree of real knowledge in relation to its environment. At present we are literally overwhelmed with data. We already have a profession called datamining, which aims to find in the tons of data rubble, deposits of usable information. But information is not yet known and is so far from being knowledge, which is not yet wisdom, which is followed by humility.

As important as this scale is in general, in terms of coping with a specific situation it is important to highlight another angle. It is about what something really is, what we really know about it, and what we think we know. It is an unfortunate phenomenon of the times when what we think we know exceeds what we actually know. It is epistemic pride, and pride is sin. On the other hand, the condition where what we think we know lies between what actually is and what we actually know can be called epistemic modesty and, at best, humility.

The societal responsibility of the scientific community is now enormous, and it is proving that not only missteps in nuclear physics and technology, but also lapses in the seemingly less "boundary" sciences can be harmful to our world. Economics, as a science, is at the cutting edge. Its commitment has never been greater in history. Every assertion raises human hopes, and error results in both social and human disappointment. One need only recall the hazardous scientific theses about the predictable behaviour of options markets, the fairy tales about mortgages as a kind of social assurance, or the constant reassurances about the autonomous behaviour of markets. Markets were, are and will remain bounded spaces with a rich structure of rules that were, are and will be imposed on them from outside by those who (mostly covertly) control the markets. There is no such thing as a free global market in the absolute meaning of these words.

Conveniently, the result of the cubic model is not a specific number, and it doesn't even work with quantities at all. We are thus countering the contemporary obsession with precise numbers derived from imprecise data. We humans love simple and beautiful mathematical relationships and believe that the simpler and more beautiful they are, the more they can encompass a wider range of topics. But this is not true, because wherever the human factor enters these relationships, the probability of error increases many times, if not in order of magnitude.

Our models do not report that the security is, for example, 3.98877665, just like the computer in the famous book The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy always gave the result that the meaning of everything is 42. The idea that something that is one-tenth of a percent more is automatically better, even if the statistical error is ten percent, is a dangerous triumph of manipulation over common sense and even good education.

 

7. Finding the next move

Getting to know the situation, understanding it and gaining insight into it are the prerequisites for making the right decision on the next possible move. They are a necessary condition, but far from a sufficient one. Whatever we want to use, we have to be skilled at it, and finding the next move is a key skill that leads to a better portrayal of our environment.

7.1 Knowledge and skills

If we are talking about exploiting the information obtained for decision-making purposes, it is necessary to think about time constants. Learning means receiving the information flow in bits per second, extracting the necessary information content and creating knowledge in the form of different variants of possible scenarios, preferably in the form of multi-models - what happens when? and how to react to the encountered situation.

If the learning process is continuous, the multi-models developed will gradually cover the scope of the expected situations. Then it can be said that by combining them together or by clever switching we are able to reasonably solve even very complicated situations, unless a black swan comes [11]. An example of such an approach is a hockey team that has rehearsed standard situations, has a detailed analysis of the opposite team, including the strategies they use, and tries different tactics within the game that might be successful.

However, if the environment changes rapidly, or if previously undescribed behaviours emerge, you need to quickly create a new working model. This takes time because information is distributed sequentially in bits per second. Before obtaining the appropriate information content depicting a model of the new situation, we need to enter a standby mode and minimize possible losses. The knowledge of management that is not forced to wait for recommendations from consulting firms will be manifested in the speed and quality of its decision-making processes [7] especially in a state of time pressure. These moments are often crucial for successful management of unexpected dynamic situations.

It is possible to claim that our brains do the same. When quick decisions are required, neuronal pathways that have proven themselves in the past are used. The stored knowledge is parallel and redundant. When they fail, a person learns and gradually improves his or her model for dealing with a given situation.

7.2 Step forward, step backward

In making good decisions about future actions, it is important to keep in mind the fundamental difference between insight and calculations of options. It is important that, especially in the most crucial situations we face, we intuitively follow the right steps, because there is no time for long calculations and analyses

In dealing with the situation, the proverbial hic Rhodes, hic salta applies more than ever, but that doesn't mean that we focus only on the here and now and push out of our minds everything that has so far proved useless. Situations change by the moment and suddenly an auspicious moment comes along, and we've forgotten the previously unusable idea. We all know it. The moment we throw anything away as part of a pious clean-up and finally get rid of it, then the very next moment we need it. Despite having assessed the situation, we have evaluated that we will never need it again.

Another important decision-making skill is the ability to take a step back. This involves the art of waiting and resisting the evolutionary setup that forces us to take advantage of what is available to us right here and now. Present possibilities always seem more attractive to us than future ones, which are somehow distant and nebulous. Let's remind ourselves how many of us know how to postpone consumption, beginning with the best morsels, through our shopping behaviour and ending with giving up some of the delights that can damage our health noticeably over time. Let us take the sad fate of the monkeys who could not drop the nut for which they had reached through the neck of the bottle and could not pull the fist holding the nut out of the bottle. Sometimes it's just good to take your time and maneuver backwards.

A particular skill in decision making is the ability to distinguish between easy and hard or easy and hard decisions. Then to be able to reduce the number of difficult, challenging and hard ones. Let's strive for steps that don't necessarily lead to situations that are on the edge, so to speak, of “who gets who” or “double or quits”. That may be fun in play, it gets the adrenaline pumping, but not in life situations where people's fates, health and lives are at stake.

In an age of complex computer models and artificial intelligence, this step backwards is of great importance. For example, let's have a weather forecast model that is naturally designed to help us forecast for the coming hours and days. Imagine the possibility of running it backwards in time. We can compare its forecast for yesterday with what we saw in the sky yesterday. Or we can return yesterday's data to it and compare its predictions online by looking at the sky.

A step backwards into certainty is better than succumbing to the illusion that we know the future and it appears to us as certain as the past. If the free lunch is the father, then the certainty of the future is the mother of the fraud and of many unhappy human, family and social fortunes. When it is no longer possible to avoid a conflict situation, it is necessary to remember that wisdom lies in the art of being a winner always just a little, halfway... Our moves should reflect this.

A good proven method are moves involving offers that cannot be refused, leading to a series of exchanges of certain values. In a situation that threatens devastating conflict, a bit of steam pressure can be let off.

8. Conclusion

Each new move integrates all our previous knowledge and experience. A metaphor is often given - you cannot enter the same river twice - and we all subconsciously imagine different water flowing through the river each time we do. But that wouldn't matter, we perceive the river at a higher discrimination level anyway and are not able to discern the sub-details in it. Where the big change is, however, is in ourselves - the second step into the same river is different because we have already had the experience of the first entry.

Conductor Jiří Bělohlávek mentioned a similar idea when he said that if he conducts a piece for the second time, it is a completely different job because he has already done the first staging and can concentrate better on the greater detail. This is also the reason why musicians play the same piece over and over again, because there is no learning without repetition.

Modern technology also uses a proven method of repetition, where pilots or controllers are trained on special simulators, where they are exposed to more and more complex tasks to which they must react quickly. Constant repetition increases their attention, professional proficiency and their personal resilience. However, in real life, every situation is unique and even a thoroughly prepared person may have a different mental fitness and thus different reactions each time.

 

 

Let's give a little recap on how to approach an unexpected situation:

• Defining the situation - carefully defining the boundaries of the situation, especially as it relates to the different perceptions of its internal and external environment, the boundaries of the known and the unknown, and carefully distinguishing between active and passive areas in its environment.
• Reacting to environmental changes - finding, monitoring, evaluating and recording changes in the internal and external environment of the situation in terms of the quality of their feedback, shifts in characteristics (G, M, P) and their subsequent influence and shaping, where possible, including the triggering of new changes.
• Naming core and key values - identifying their characteristics, i.e. form, content and meaning.
• Estimating thresholds and ceilings - monitoring and evaluating the degree of difficulty or complexity of the situation, the amount and growth dynamics of the costs of maintaining this complexity and determining their impact on the overall dynamics of the organization.
• Memory creation - the careful tracking and recording of historical events, including interpretations in the broadest possible context, in a variety of forms with varying levels of acceptability and clarity.

Some decisions are simple and easy, some are difficult and challenging. One of the key skills is to keep a cool head and suppress your own ego and emotions. Efficiency is better than pomposity, simplicity is better than complexity. Look for useful and simple steps in every situation. Let's accept our own mistakes, because we are only human, and it is human to make mistakes. Responsibility is a duty and restraint with humility is a virtue. Let us refrain from being too imaginative, adventurous and risk-taking.

In conclusion, in the sense of the above-mentioned epistemic modesty and humility, we would like to present some thoughts that are not an answer to the traditional question of what to do, but rather a complement to it, what not to do in dealing with the situation:

• Let's not succumb to the charm of excessive, unstable, and fragile growth (anything unviable should fall while it's still small).
• Let's not repeat mistakes and hand over power over our destinies and lives to people who have already failed once or even repeatedly (let's eliminate deprivers at all circumstances).
• Let's not trust that long-term risk management can be handled by people who are performance-oriented or even rewarded according to short-term performance.
• Let us by no means allow the systematic privatisation of profits and socialisation of losses.
• Let us not attempt to optimise complex phenomena (if possible, let us compensate and balance them with simplicity).
• Let's not deepen debt by lending to the indebted (better to write off debt in return for some performance).
• Let's not rebuild real trust where it cannot even be created (let's look for credibility in others and create our own one).
• Let's not cry over broken eggs and spilled milk, but let's try to cook at least a somewhat edible omelet (there is a hidden opportunity in every problem).
• Let us be aware that there is no safe situation, because at any time something unfavourable can happen.
• At every step, something needs to be done to reduce the likelihood of adverse developments and to keep creating tools to deal with them.
• Let us be conscious of what is beneficial and what is harmful to us in a given situation (let us gradually eliminate harmful practices and return to beneficial ones).
• In every situation, let us look for strong networks of interpersonal, family, interest and other relationships around us. Let us nurture them if they are favourable to our interests and be vigilant and respectful if they are not.
• Whatever steps we take in a given situation, let us strive to make it clear that they are steps of being, steps that are authentic, that come from ourselves and our conviction of their rightness. They can be wrong, of course, but they should never be untrustworthy, false or manipulative.

The solution approaches described are a form of thinking about how to properly evaluate a given situation from as many perspectives as possible. In this context, it is good to recall the "Nash equilibrium" [13], which can provide inspiration in the age of artificial intelligence when looking for future steps in very complicated situations.

In reference [8] it was shown that physics is richest in 5-dimensional space. Similarly, Kabbalah speaks, which in addition to the 3D coordinate system plus the time dimension, introduces a new dimension of spirituality, which in the first approximation can be imagined as the plot of a story. The numbers are for quantitative expression, the letters for qualitative understanding in contemplating future steps for resolving situations that arise in the spirit of Exupéry's prayer [16] (see Appendix).

Finally, let's recall a lesson from the creative fields that originality is not about not imitating anyone, but about not being imitated. Those who have not fertilized anything in their lives cannot expect a good harvest, which means that experience is inalienable, non-transferable and in the context of evolution, we must always acquire it ourselves, both through our own mistakes and those of others. These, however, are less painful for us.

9. Annex: ANTOINE DE SAINT-EXUPÉRY - PRAYER

Lord, I’m not praying for miracles and visions,

I’m only asking for power for my days.

Teach me the art of small steps!

Make me clever and witty among the diversity of days to be able to record important recognitions and experiences!

Help me prioritize to use my time accurately!

Present me with safe senses to be able to judge whether a thing is first rank or second rank priority!

I pray for power for discipline and moderation, not only to run through my life, but also to live my days reasonably, and observe unexpected pleasures and heights!

Save me from the naive belief that everything goes smoothly in life!

Present me with the sober recognition that difficulties, failures, fiascos, set-backs are additional elements given by life itself that make us grow and mature.

Send a person to me in the right moment who has enough courage and love to utter the truth!

We do not say the truth to ourselves, others say that to us.

I know that many problems get solved by themselves without doing anything.

Please help me to be able to wait!

You are the one who knows how much we need courage.

Make me worthy for the nicest, hardest, riskiest and most fragile gifts of life!

Present me with enough fantasy to be able to mediate a little bit of charity, in the right place, on the right time, with or without words!

Spare me from the fear of letting life slip!

Do not give me only things I desire, give me things I need as well!

Teach me the art of small steps!

 

10. References

[1] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/362325180_Cestami_slozitosti

[2] Kauffman S.: Čtvrtý zákon – cesty k obecné biologii, Paseka, 2004.

[3] Sun-c´: Umění války, B4U Publishing, 2008.

[4] Mandelbrot B: Fraktalista, Argo, 2014.

[5] Svítek M.: Information Physics, Elsevier, 2021

[6] Bárta M.: Sedm zákonů, Jota, 2020.

[7] Moos P., Novák M., Votruba Z.: Parametric Sensitivity in Decision Making Process, NNW 1/2020, pp 45-53.

[8] Svítek M., Kosheleva O., Kreinovich V.: Why Five Stages of Solar Activity, Why Five Stages of Grief, Why Seven Plus Minus Two: A General Geometric Explanation, UTEP-CS-22-101, 2022.

[9] https://mentallyfit.global/en/programs/#team

[10] Gödel K.: Úplnost a neúplnost, Kanina, Plzeň, 2015.

[11] Taleb N. N.: Černá labuť: Následky vysoce nepravděpodobných událostí, Paseka 2011.  

[12] Žák L.: Formování systémů bezpečnosti organizací, disertace, Moskva 2012.

[13] https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/economics/nash-equilibrium-game-theory

[14] Votruba Z.: Spolehlivost informačního výkonu, ČVUT, 2005, ISBN 80-01-03186-1.

[15] Dunbarovo číslo – Wikipedie (wikipedia.org)

[16] www.citaty.estranky.cz - ÚRYVKY Z MÝCH OBLÍBENÝCH KNÍŽEK - Antoine de Saint-Exupéry - Modlitba

České novinky1.eu