The OnMind Method - Versión 1 (Preview)

» A methodology for software analysis and design, agile project management and modest organizational management
© 2018-2021, Cesar Arcila. All rights reserved.

OnMind’s method is a way to rethink the analysis and design of systems taking conventional aspects and incorporating elements and a unique way to abstract concepts and objects of the world that are susceptible to manage or systematize in order to support and strategy that it provides in organizations, or in relation to data and infrastructure.
We would then be talking about a method for the analysis and design of systems that sympathizes with a modest organizational management (being inclusive and compatible also with small businesses), in addition to agile management software projects.

In order to address the aspects or guidelines that are proposed, the following agenda to be developed is proposed:

  1. General concept of the OnMind method
  2. Definition of key concepts (Glossary)
  3. Context for administrative professionals and stakeholders (non-technical)
  4. Aspect of modest organisational management
  5. Aspect on agile management software projects
  6. Aspect of analysis and design of information systems (A&D)
  7. What is considered and what is not part of the OnMind method? (Scope)
  8. How do the elements interact or how is the method applied?
  9. About the OnMind management tool (by the same Author)

In the present text in many cases parentheses are used as a style and convention to indicate some technical matter or explanatory commentary regarding the context, therefore, depending on a more fluid reading, such comments could be omitted, unless it is necessary to keep in mind details or a revision is desired. However, as the content progresses, it can be highly technical, for example, points 6, 7 and 8. Even so, explanations of interest could be found in such matters, so that, if it is not a cause for confusion by technical language, anyone interested is also welcome. In addition, a glossary is incorporated as a reference on key concepts and as a basis for understanding.

About the Author

Systems Engineer, with knowledge in Project Management and affinities (organizational or business vision), Oracle Certified Professional (OCP) as developer, knowledge in ITIL and studies in Philosophy. Since the nineties I have started a professional career that has moved from the technical to a management profile, adapting to new trends and keeping the best of the origins. Experience participating in software projects (ERP, CRM, Workflow) with various information technologies and involving major companies in different sectors (Finance, Public Services, Technology, Education, Health and Government), additionally projects with networks and currently cloud computing.

Leader, expert and creative, with a singular point of view, holistic and unifying approach. Computer polyglot, passionate about technology projects that align with well thought out ideas (e.g. project onmind.co :)

1. General concept of the OnMind method

To introduce us to the general concept it is important to refer to the simplified foundation that came out of my experience and above all inspiration:

In a world or context of ideas and mental illusions, mental fabrications arise. This is reflected in the systems and in what is projected. These fabrications (or making) are linked to identities. Not all identities actively participate, hence the distinction between participants. Furthermore, the identities can form circles of links, these can be interpreted as natural roles of the identities in a context. Then, we have the environment and the things that we distinguish in a different way from the identities, referring even to concepts or subjects. Processes arise where entries or requests are required that usually generate some activity (or their support). Since this world is highly influenced by the financial aspect, we will have summaries of accounts and their operations. As soon as something is highly specific or requires more detail, it can be said that there are extraordinary and complementary things (extra). This is the basis of an analysis in my view, hence I participate in it as a method, perhaps with some additions.

In a general sense, the OnMind method consists of guidelines or aspects that start from a way of approaching the analysis and design of information systems and even points to agile projects and a modest organisational management (being inclusive and also compatible with small businesses), regularly relying on what it calls or catalogues as a mission oriented data environment (MODE), for example, the OnMind software platform. Some guidelines are more significant and fundamental than others that can be more flexible, such guidelines will be developed in this text.

Being mainly a technological issue with an impact on project management and lightness in business, the field to which it points refers us to interested parties, both technology professionals (computer science and software) and administrative, whose modern vision does not discuss the influence, the strategy it provides and the support of computer science for the performance of management and the size or scope of organizations in our time, as well as the factor around knowledge.

When speaking here of agile projects, it should be avoided to confuse them with immediacy or with a linear expectation of significant cost reduction, given that this is not necessarily the case, simply, an agile project has a more fluid natural course than when faced a larger project. In some cases, large projects can be executed in smaller phases allowing agile projects.

In principle, the method was born to support micro-projects and short-phase projects, based on the implementation of the OnMind software platform (although it does not require the method, it gives a better orientation taking advantage of its characteristics). Posteriormente, la plataforma terminó teniendo incidencia y dió forma al método.

Although there are several agile methodologies for projects, in addition to its original meaning, this method points to various criteria as well as benefits:

The term “OnMind” could be understood by the words “on” and “mind” such as “ignite the mind” (or awaken, which can be related to creativity), and was used to promote the project of the same name (the software platform OnMind) whose original slogan quotes: “Turn on your ideas with a digital experience”, currently …

Apps or platform supported projects to turn on ideas

2. Definition of key concepts (Glossary)

In order to achieve an understanding approach of a subject with general technical aspects, the following glossary is used. You can review it or leave it for later reference by going into the subject with the following topic.

3. Context for administrative professionals and stakeholders (non-technical)

Although we start from a technological context, we focus on the reception of information technology that supports management in businesses, organizations, or projects, eventually involving stakeholders of different profiles.

Among the fields of action of technology, one of those that demands attention is the business environment, being fundamental for the development of organizations that either reach a larger dimension every day, or have a different dynamic to the organizations prior to information technology of our times. With globalization, or at least, given the scope of international interaction in today’s world, the development of information technology has been decisive, and in particular what has been known as management information technology (that which is of interest to us and which is related to business strategy).

As technology advances every day more, or new elements are introduced, man begins to designate terms, talking about things like the new era of knowing, cloud computing, hyper-mobility or hyper-connectivity, “Big Data” with modern databases, but what does that have to do with most occupations or someone non-technical? In reality, the designation of terms is not as interesting as the understanding of what it suggests and its beginnings, so there is no reason to be obfuscated.

We have said that we are talking about the field that has been known as management informatics, we are not talking about technology for video games, or editors of media or content (graphics, video or sound), or that which supports simulations of scientific computing, pure artificial intelligence or robotics, even if they even come to relate or generate contributions between such fields.

In order to land the context, it could be said that the computation developed with military interest was important for the scientific development (as influence in America we could cite NASA), then gave way to the support in finances, being born then the management informatics in the organizations and businesses that were growing, while networks (wiring, apparatus and computers intended for communication and access to information) were incorporated and the use of the Internet (which originated in a military project in the late 1960s) was expanded, being introduced into homes in the 1990s with providers for this service (ISP, from Internet Service Providers), generally telephone companies at that time provided the service. Of course, this would give way to electronic commerce, which is annexed to management informatics as long as networks, infrastructure, data and obviously management are used.

To return to a couple of terms mentioned above, when we talk about cloud computing means taking advantage of the current reach of networks through the Internet with a greater reach or a dynamic that makes it possible from a mobile phone or a tablet to manage business activities or involve contractors, employees, customers, even processes that result in the self-management of a consumer from wherever he is, for example, that a customer requests a service or that a payment or purchase is managed from his laptop through the Internet. The prevailing model consists of servers (which are specialized computers designed to serve others, or to manage services) that are published in a provider (unless you have your own infrastructure) by providing presence over the Internet, usually centrally, for devices, computers or devices to access a service, resource or other similar, also using existing telecommunications providers (Internet service providers or ISP).

On the other hand, it is good to return to the term “Big Data”, since it is important to first understand that our topic involves both infrastructure (networks and others) and the treatment or mechanism for storing data. Formerly the information remained in paper and file cabinets, then office packages emerged with a spreadsheet tool (such as Microsoft Excel) and is often used to support a database of lists of information (although, since decades ago to have technical resource was used a programming language to manage data files called COBOL, still used, for example in some ATMs), but were the so-called relational databases that operate in network (or to be precise, (it could resemble a way of organizing a library manually or formerly document file cabinets) and that can use a standard mechanism or common language to handle the information (called SQL language, adding NoSQL databases that are presented as an alternative with their own way of operating without requiring SQL).

With this type of database (or engines) computer systems are developed without dealing with instances or mechanisms covered by such tools and focusing on processes or the business that is subject to analysis, ie, such databases (free or suppliers that market them) are a component of frequent use by computer systems. When social networks arrived (such as Facebook and others) or other companies with a global dimension (for example, banks, telephone companies, governments, etc.), the size of the information they managed gave rise to the term “Big Data”. One would then understand that when it comes to an immense population of data, or that it is information that covers 50 states (as in the USA), or business expansion in more than 2 or three countries, or complex processing with data that begin to be bulky, we would be talking about “Big Data”. While OnMind maybe is not the most ideal for Big Data projects at the moment, except for feasibility in specific cases, what is described gives us an overview of the understanding and scope that will be addressed later.

However, under the context of projects with management informatics, software engineering has been developed, in which one of the primary factors or phases refers to analysis. Those who play the role of systems or functional analysts (usually engineers) use diagrams and documents to land within a project what the client or internal user requires for the system taking into account a scope. It could be said that such documents manifest to a large extent agreements between the parties (computer equipment and key stakeholders), and some others that bring diagrams, incorporate what could be the analogy of the plans of a building, in which case the result would be the database of a project and the design of the computer system that communicates with the database. Many formats and diagrams are well influenced by industry (the large technology corporations) and have given their results in recent decades, setting a trend and achieving great acceptance. However, although some diagrams pretend to be understandable for a user or an interested party, sometimes they can offend the user, or he falls into saturation (excess diagrams, which demands time), especially when they correspond to a more technical level addressed to professionals in the technology area (both leaders and developers), of course, with a different purpose, to preserve the knowledge of the product or project being an asset for the corresponding organization (either a technology provider that part of a product itself, or a company that has its own technology area with in-house development, even outsourcing).

Given the context, the OnMind method looks for both simplicity and agility in an appropriate point to approach technology projects, it could be more convenient in less strict scenarios before the conventional, with acceptance and openness to a renovating way of doing things, or simply in projects for short phases (micro-projects) in a company regardless of size, as long as it considers an organizational vision.

4. Aspect of modest organisational management

By “modest” we want to indicate a way, both panoramic and simplified, to consider aspects of management to be inclusive with small businesses that are projected with an organizational vision. Regardless of the size of the company, in order to provide a service or product can be defined areas, or at least roles or suppliers that cover them. These areas or roles respond to different focuses to organize and manage companies, for example: management, sales, customer service (which is important to have its own management), human resources, administrative or financial area, technology, and if it is the case the production area. However, this can change if, for example, a company is visualized under project management where areas or resources are available to project managers who can share resources (what is known as a Project Management Office or PMO).

Taking as a reference the influence of the classical school of the theory of organization and management, Henri Fayol (1917) defines the act of administration as a process composed of functions indicating that “To administer is to predict and plan, organize, direct, coordinate and control”. Added to the need for communication and information management in organizations, management informatics can be understood with a strategic vision, in many cases also comprehensive, which provides support on these factors, for example, organize, control, communicate, manage, attend, serve, and so on.

What an analyst or a member of a work team that applies the OnMind method does, especially when it comes to projects, is to use a series of elements and tools to achieve an agile and simple result depending on a process, product or service within the context of our interest. Understand it agile and simple if it is compared with other ways of approaching projects estimated from one year onwards (or macro-projects of 3 years) and avoid confusing it with any immediatist sense that results out of context.

Although the method suggests a technical aspect (even advanced), it is possible that understanding the principles there is an approach for interdisciplinary work between the stakeholders of a project, especially in the first instances or instances of analysis, also taking advantage of the fact that today by general culture people have become familiar with the use of computer technologies in one way or another.

It will be seen then, that if mind maps (of concepts) are used to illustrate or to understand a matter of interest between the parts, sometimes prototypes of visual design (drawings) are used on an application (“app”), planned meetings are carried out and a board of tasks is used for a work team with goals and well defined scope, it would be evidencing a dynamic that operates in the management scope and this has been considered by the OnMind method.

A reference point can be the application menu of the OnMind platform, it is influenced by an organizational vision as we can see in its main categories or options:

To cite another element, we take into account the Japanese theory known as the “5S” around business organization and quality in processes, even applied in everyday life: Seiri, Seiton, Seiso, Seiketsu, Shitsuke. Something like sort, set, shine, standardise, sustain (about discipline). In reality, when considering other elements or the strategic factor in a technical matter, management aspects are integrated that are accepted in the method.

The method is also pronounced in favor of creativity in projects that generally have some innovation factor, without this being an excuse for those who do not like formalities at all. This means that the development team must manage its technical activities and in many organizations quality records, standards that may somehow lose sight of the essential (sometimes have a trend to make an effort for a quality certification in an organization) when they can be looked for other ways or simplified. Creativity influences productivity and ultimately quality, including the trust, purpose and sense of belonging of creative team members.

It is prudent to keep in mind, in human management in organizations, aspects such as the creativity of people (in this case could be applied to the project team), there are those who speak of happiness at work or happy company, ultimately this provides a contribution to good customer relations and loyalty (care or provide factors for customer loyalty). However, by grounding this in the reality of the organization, even if a company embraces this approach or can provide the best for it, in practical life it cannot cover everything or have control of everything that corresponds around the team members, nor is everything its business. However, if you provide the best you can on your part, according to the organization, you will be in the right direction.

Similarly, while measurements and indicators in processes, projects, areas, even performance evaluations, may be well based on the fact that “what cannot be measured cannot be controlled”, it is important for organizations to consider that reality may be different at some point, that is, many times there is an excess of indicators and above all the idea is evaded that not everything can always be controlled, perhaps it is time for a better focus on key and simple indicators, even with a humanist sense if the organization welcomes it (for example: thinking in the human talent), without neglecting the financial.

I consider to introduce here the term “intuition” applied to management, I am not sure if there are those who use it officially in the academy of business administrators, but I believe that finally in many situations managers make use of intuition to make decisions, as an aspect of natural leadership. I even dare to go a little further, thinking that although the data is relevant to the market, a survey, some indicators, etc., would give priority to intuition leaving the former under the tutelage of this or in a second place, still having its usefulness when making decisions. It is understandable that intuition cannot be measured, it escapes mental schemes and can be welcomed by those who, far from any scheme, have openness and wisdom with their nature of leader listening to their inner voice.

5. Aspect on agile management software projects

In reality, the method involves the use of a tool, better yet, a platform (e.g., OnMind software) that provides what is intended to be catalogued as a “Management Oriented Data Environment” (MODE). This in order to have a basis for tackling software projects in less time, which confronts the fact that in many occasions it is required to dedicate 2 or 3 months of planning, but if it is considered that an issue is tackled with a well-defined and specific scope, projects by short phases or micro-projects last the same time. If it is about the implementation of a macro-project or a new company that is introduced to the market requiring the training of personnel for a commercial deployment, it is not the appropriate case of application of the method. What is indicated is that if one talks about micro-projects, one can expect that it will take less than 6 months, while in other scales it can be the time invested in planning, keeping in mind the fact that each case is each case, in addition to applying it to practical life, although one has a holistic and integrating vision, not necessarily a method turns out to be for everything.

Inspired by the fundamentals of agile project tools, also relying on a platform such as OnMind, it is highly probable that available functions will be rescued, such as user management, access and security, some components, and even enable the implementation of operable prototypes. To cite an example, while a project from scratch can be invested between 6 months and 1 year in fine-tuning an enterprise security system or module (although it is still subject to maintenance), this would be a time that is reduced if this platform is used, in addition to other factors it provides. In the case of OnMind software, given its structure and approach aligned with the method, it is designed to be suitable by means of micro-projects or projects.

In other words, a project that generally takes more time can be approached with the OnMind method and a tool that accompanies it (or MODE, which we will discuss later), so that it can be considered a larger project (1 year or more) as one to be approached in less time in an agile way. Time is money, reducing time does not necessarily always reduce costs substantially, in many cases also translates as the opportunity or benefit that means having a service or product in time for sale or use.

Although the method does not address the risk management of a project if it considers that in a practical way there has to be a tolerable risk, that in a complex situation can be assumed or is considered consistent with the investment, the lower the investment, the greater the tolerance. On the other hand, given that iterations and instances are considered (or microphases in order to develop the software), as we advance in the text, if we mention the risk of investing time in iterations or assuming a couple of days in operable prototypes, also with the risk of changes to the requirement. In this sense, it is necessary to estimate a percentage in maintenance due to the iterations that introduce it in the march (for example, 20%) and a minimum time for execution of micro-projects (for example, 1 month and a half with the cost that it implies), as well as to consider as maximum number of revision iterations with the client the limit of 3 (three).

The parties should be aware that altering the scope alters the delivery commitment and it is necessary to take care of it, as there is a down payment (when outsourced) the project team would wait until delivery to cover the amount of the project (unless another consideration), likewise the key stakeholders (or the client) are generally waiting for the delivery event so that it can affect both parties. However, if it takes too long (exceeding the maximum iterations of review with the client) it is a sign of alert and determination of an immovable scope for the micro-project (or short phase), or something of a larger dimension that should have been considered, in which cases it is generally not reported on time. Such a review could also result in a renegotiation that may also impact the project budget. This is a risk that one runs when approaching a project in less time by contemplating some validations on the fly that give clarity on the client’s need or on the orientation of the micro-project with the intention of a satisfactory delivery.

6. Aspect of analysis and design of information systems (A&D)

When it comes to designing computer systems with databases (in many cases relational or SQL type) it is understood that the conventional mode has its application and reception because it is known in the academic training of computer professionals and in companies. Rethinking or confronting this requires an open mind and a welcome that may find support with the introduction of NoSQL databases (being an alternative or complement to those that use SQL language). It is noted that here we are dealing with a subject that refers us to technical aspects, although some concepts may be novel in general terms.

There is an annex on Codign Focuses

I have prepared a separate article (in the link above) where an approach and overview is presented with criteria on the technical elements required to produce software. It talks a little bit about how a trained team can support administrative and business processes with technology applicable to our days (programming languages, architecture for the web and mobile applications among other features).

The stages of software development

Simply saying that the software fabrication process can have some stages that vary depending on your specific application. For now we can think of a Diagnosis (or preliminary analysis), Analysis and Design, Codification, Tests, Deployment and Maintenance (or transition to a new cycle or project), in addition to documentation that can be functional (such as help or guides) or technical, and can run from minor to greater extent until the release of the software. These can be applied to a project or to a requirement of the client or user, similar to what can be considered a “micro-project”.

Introduction of Archetypes

By situating ourselves in analysis and design, with the OnMind method, archetypes are introduced, understood as significant categories identified by the observation of systems and concepts, ultimately super-classes or large tables, so that instead of learning what is known as normalization or how to relate tables (or collections), archetypes are established and the analyst’s capacity for abstraction is sought to identify an object with the best archetype to which it fits, the defined relationships will be of a hierarchical type between archetypes, and even with themselves.

While in a traditional model a significantly large system exceeds 1000 tables (objects or collections), the archetypes proposed by the OnMind author for his own platform are less than 40, which resemble classes of objects or data supercollections). The introduction of some archetypes leads us to understand that a computer analyst can observe some patterns, concepts that are always at the bottom of a matter or are repeated when applying the abstraction of world reality to a computer system. While relational databases promote infinite possibilities of objects (collections or tables), with their possible relationships or interrelations, with archetypes it can be reduced dramatically.

However, the possibilities can also be numerous when archetypes are applied to the user’s collections (which would be seen as something virtual with respect to the persistent repository). In more sophisticated words, when one speaks of archetypes it is to think in classes but not in objects, because the latter would be defined by configuration or in a virtual (dynamic) way. Such objects (which end up being simply a row of data) we prefer to call them a making, so that it could be said that mental fabrications (a making) of specific ideas (archetypes) are made, or if you want to see it differently mainly refer to data sheets.

One way to illustrate what is achieved with archetypes is that it becomes possible to introduce an interested resource without higher studies (just with high school) on well-defined archetypes, as if in the figurative sense one simply learns multiplication tables (archetypes), rather than having a knowledge base on sets, formal computer foundations, relational databases and systems analysis or software engineering. At the tool level, the OnMind platform proposes its own internal archetypes for its repository.

The archetypes defined for OnMind are essentially 10: Identities, Entrants, Circles, Environment, Things, Entries, Activities, Summary, Operations and Extra (Any).

Given the essential archetypes, one identifies in the reality of an issue or process, which of these fits best, as if they were specific models that can be repeatedly observed in the world, at least with a simpler analytical view. While the traditional academy induces you to identify objects in the world that are numerous, with the proposal of the OnMind method it is concluded that such objects should not be very different from the essential archetypes and therefore the objects would not be defined in the conventional way but within or as part of the archetypes, these parts would be the makings which can also be interpreted as data sheets. Of course, if a better distribution is needed, about 40 tables or data collections can be reached depending on the implementation, but the basics are repeated. Another way to understand archetypes is to think about how the author has been inspired:

In a world or context of ideas and mental illusions, mental fabrications arise. This is reflected in the systems and in what is projected. These fabrications (or making) are linked to identities. Not all identities actively participate, hence the distinction between participants. Furthermore, the identities can form circles of links, these can be interpreted as natural roles of the identities in a context. Then, we have the environment and the things that we distinguish in a different way from the identities, referring even to concepts or subjects. Processes arise where entries or requests are required that usually generate some activity (or their support). Since this world is highly influenced by the financial aspect, we will have summaries of accounts and their operations. As soon as something is highly specific or requires more detail, it can be said that there are extraordinary and complementary things (extra). This is the basis of an analysis in my view, hence I participate in it as a method, perhaps with some additions.

Archetypes and their Hierarchy

To give an example, think of an archetype called “Contact” (or identity) and a second called “User” (or entrant), if the contacts refer to the information of any person (whether client, employee, supplier, contractor, subscriber, etc.) and the users are those who have direct interaction with the system (accounts, roles, members with subscription profile, etc.), then the archetype “Contact” has a higher level of hierarchy than the archetype “User”, which is associated with one of the contacts of the archetype “Contact”. A hierarchical relationship is established in which the “Contact” is denoted first than the “User” and is associated with the user, even if a user had no associated contact at any given moment. When speaking of hierarchical relations what is meant is that it is not necessary to express many relationships to many even if they exist, it seeks to avoid expressing the duality of father and mother (or several parents) with a child or many children, therefore, expresses only one main relationship, the most defined or strongest.

As a second example, let’s visualize the format of an invoice, which has header and detail, and which we will refer to as charges. There is a well-defined hierarchy in which the invoice header has priority over the charges, which in turn are associated with the invoice header. Both the header and the charges have a unique identifier, at least internally (this remains as it has been known). Now, we may have defined an archetype “Summary” to catalogue every document or heading and an archetype “Operations” to be assigned to any type of charge or detail concept. As long as archetypes are simplified, which can also be seen as persistent objects, something is reduced, be it management or events in an implementation.

In effect, the relations not expressed as long as only the main one is expressed, must be compensated by means of codification of computer programs and mechanisms such as indexes. This gives greater importance and frequent reference to a data dictionary (where each structure or archetype is presented detailing the possible information with its characteristics), which if well understood, would consist of describing a smaller number of tables or data collections.

It could then be seen as learning or consulting multiplication tables in one order.

Applicable diagrams

Archetypes and hierarchical relationships are the basis for analysis and design under the OnMind method. Diagrams that account for these criteria can be organigarma-style hierarchies, or a tree, conceptual map, graphs, or the like, as long as it provides an appropriate visual arrangement that expresses well-defined hierarchies (highest to lowest). There are tools that are already developed for this purpose.

For the effects of the analysis phase, even in a preliminary diagnosis, we introduce the use of mind maps (or concepts) being applicable to clarify the scenario or case, or the panorama of the requirements of the micro-project with a holistic vision and context. The idea of centering an analysis with mind maps instead of process flows was taking shape while studying philosophy courses and preparing exams with this type of aids, as well as observing how our universe is organized. As an engineer I remembered that they resembled context diagrams (used in analysis methodologies proposed decades ago and that may have their validity) but they are distinguished in that neither guidelines on systems nor levels are required. When the mind mapping tools (digital) improved, I saw an opportunity for the applicability of something simplified, as well as currently using other types of tools such as “Business Process Management” (BPM) that focus on process flow and require technical knowledge (a role and a notation called BPMN). It is estimated that who has been introduced in mind maps in a matter of minutes (having abstraction and cataloguing capacity) or a student of practice (regardless of his career) who has prepared his exams with this type of visual tools, would be apt to understand what an analyst wants to visualize or validate.

Given that this is a more spontaneous analysis, it does require the guidance or technical foundations of the analyst to give an approach slightly influenced by a goal of technological application, without forgetting that what is done is to validate the understanding of a practical scenario.

About databases

At no time is it restricted that this is applied to a type of database, either SQL or NoSQL, welcoming both categories, but in terms of conceptualization the objects derived from archetypes can be expressed as classes or tables in the style of an SQL database to be compatible with these, since on the contrary, if it is a database NoSQL whose collection is composed (for example, when stored in the same collection header and detail) is expressed in JSON is not readable for SQL databases widely used in organizations. As for NoSQL databases, those that have a language close to SQL, for example Cassandra, are more compatible. In addition, as archetypes end up being large tables in an organization they can have a good performance with column storage database mechanisms.

Support in tool catalogued as MODE

Introducing the idea of using a platform catalogued as MODE (“Management Oriented Data Environment”), it could then be understood that while a BPM focuses on processes using diagrams with their notation (BPMN) and requires technical or qualified resources, a MODE simply uses trees or mindmaps with a holistic (or panoramic) sense and in terms of the level of data focuses on well-defined archetypes. With a BPM, workflows or processes are represented, while with a MODE it is possible in a simplified way using an attribute of an archetype for processes enabling workflows without requiring this notation (without BPMN). While both propose reduction in code implementation and in time, in some cases it could be seen as a substitute or alternative to the other, perhaps in other cases they will complement each other more would not be a matter of method. The main contribution of our approach at this point is to offer a simplified perspective with openness to resources without further experience and to key stakeholders within an interdisciplinary team, as has been well indicated, it is not required to know flowcharts or notations or what derives from it, only capacity for abstraction of key concepts applicable to a scenario or case.

Regarding the use of archetypes of the OnMind method in a MODE, a greater reduction in code can be achieved than with a conventional data design, especially if it is possible in some cases to apply operable prototypes (i.e., they can run under a standard with some available functions). Such operable prototypes are not necessarily the result of the platform itself, but arise from specifications (spec) for their implementation (i.e., that are developed) starting from the standard and internal framework (libraries or API) that promotes the MODE, although in the case of the OnMind platform there is also an appropriate tool.

There is an annex on [Frontal Specifications] (https://onmind.co/doc/code/es/OnMind-Front-Specs.md)

7. What is considered and what is not part of the OnMind method? (Scope)

Introducing ourselves into the scope implies a technical knowledge base, we appreciate welcome or understanding for those interested in other disciplines. The OnMind method gathers some practices taking already existing elements, some coincided with what was thought to be raised while the method was being devised (for example, the author did not concoct in a principle on NoSQL databases, which turned out to be similar in their fundamentals to the method), and other elements that are integrated or are the factor that makes it possible to speed up projects with OnMind (one even thinks of a tool that currently complements the method). Let’s see what inspired or coincided with the OnMind method and is incorporated as aspects and tools.

  1. Mind maps. The mind maps are a style of diagram that gives a vision of the context on something connecting ideas, they must be approached with the fundamental technical criteria, as well as those of management without isolating itself from the fact that it represents a concept in itself. They are simply a way of abstracting something with a meaning and evidently require such ability of assimilation and abstraction worthy of a professional or almost any person even if it is something general (not necessarily detailed), therefore, can be simpler for interdisciplinary work or access with less barrier of understanding by professionals from disciplines other than technological.

  2. Task board. In general terms, it consists of a visual aid that can provide an overview of the activity required for a resource or equipment, with a state. As an example, there is the Kanban board, derived or part of a system invented by Toyota, where Kanban cards or board specifically refers to a way of managing tasks taking into account a workload and a few states for the delivery of something with the premise just in time (JIT). Who knows the methodology “Scrum” in which a similar board is incorporated, could be used in a method OnMind expanded or customized, however, OnMind in its simplicity does not require “Scrum” or “Kanban”, just a board, leaving it to the convenience of the team or organization.

  3. Use of “markdown” to document. Markdown is a writing style that uses conventions to produce texts that can be published as digital articles or on a nice looking website. Being sophisticated, it is a markup language and its first or main case of use was in emails, where writing plain text with some conventions could be translated into the language of browsers or email clients (in HTML). In the last decade it has been taking hold being currently trend to write articles, even books, or a blog on the Internet. The OnMind method proposes to use “markdown” to document, for this there are even free editors. To the extent that the use of documents with this convention is implemented, the dependence on word processors can be progressively reduced and a better integration is obtained with other systems, which may well subsist as long as it is still required for commercial documents and above all when it is not something digital. You can find an essential Markdown guide at our site, as well as a simple editor built into the OnMind platform.

  1. Databases with less referential restriction. This is a matter of technical detail that should not imply greater impact on the results of a system with the scope to apply our method, nor does it require greater attention by non-technical stakeholders. As an example, our own product called OnMind (as the method) promotes its own implementation on a database engine, or it uses a data repository (with a pseudo-model or meta-model, i.e. an internal model) that does not necessarily implement the mechanisms of SQL databases (nor a strict normalization), rather, it takes advantage of SQL databases avoiding what is unnecessary for the internal model of the repository. It could be said that it is inspired by or agrees with existing technologies (for example, MyISAM database engine, Aria or MyRocks in MySQL or MariaDB, as well as NoSQL databases) insofar as it does not impose the implementation of persistent relationships or restriction of foreign keys, however, for transaction purposes, preference can be given to SQL databases (for example, Oracle, or the InnoDB engine in MySQL/MariaDB). The repository of our OnMind product implements a scheme or structure of its own, but in turn can have models without fixed structure, simulating one of the characteristics of the NoSQL databases, or rather, welcomes and mixes characteristics of both the structure of an SQL database for its internal model, and NoSQL for collections or derived tables. Evidently, if a restriction is not applied in the database should be reviewed if validation is implemented at code level, this is not very different from when validating personalized messages for the user in which the use of code has also been required even if it is a database with referential restriction.

  2. Use of Archetypes and Hierarchies (with hierarchical diagrams). This point has been previously addressed under the title “Aspect of analysis and design of information systems” and is one of the main contributions of the OnMind method. The introduction of some archetypes with their hierarchies leads us to understand that a computer analyst can observe some patterns, concepts that are always at the bottom of a matter or are repeated when applying the abstraction of the observable world to a computer system. The method considers that transmitting defined archetypes with hierarchical relationships may be more digestible by an empirical resource than known or conventional analysis and design. At the tool level, the OnMind platform proposes its own internal archetypes for its repository. Perhaps for some, the idea of a repository with archetypes is close to a “DataMart” used in data warehouses but minimal and operable. On the other hand, a hierarchical diagram is appropriate to graphically represent the archetypes with their hierarchies. These diagrams can resemble a mind map insofar as they are trees, however, the visual layout is different from the folder organization of a file manager (such as Finder, Explorer, etc.). The reason to avoid imposing persistent relationships in databases, is to think in exchange in hierarchical relationships (from a parent to a child with no place to other relationships, ie, even if they exist are not denoted), therefore a diagram is not required entity relationship and may even be inappropriate. Evidently, when speaking of hierarchical relationships implies that only one relationship applies, the most significant, any other that is observed is not reported to the database.

  3. UML optionally and at minimum. An interested person, either technical or resource without higher studies (just with high school) does not need nor is expected to know about the diagrams proposed under UML (Unified Modeling Language), rather, can be introduced into mind maps and hierarchical diagrams, hence it is proposed that the use of UML be optional. So if you are not computer oriented or are not familiar these diagrams for you do not need to review this point. Currently UML diagrams are a standard in the software industry and cover various aspects, however, the OnMind method considers them in specific cases. For example, the use cases can be of common use in requirements, while the sequence diagram is only admitted when it is strictly necessary because it is a complex and very specific process, which deserves its contribution as a knowledge base about the product. The class diagram can be used if it is already customary in an organization, only that for the OnMind method would represent something virtual or even more abstract, since the relationships can be expressed with a hierarchical diagram described above, is definitely optional. It could be said then, that UML is emitted to the minimum, basically for use cases and in optional mode, as well as the sequence diagram or other eventually for very specific situations. When use cases do not apply, a classical or a free requirements survey format can be used that does not impose the use of drawings or UML.

  4. Use of technologies with enterprise affinity, for the cloud and digital. What we want to indicate here is that in the case of data and infrastructure it is preferable technologies that give reason for it, minimum virtual machines (or similar, example: docker, kubernetes) onwards. Therefore, given the business approach, conventional web hosting is excluded (or the common hosting for websites), or it refers to projects in the cloud or software platforms factor that influences and gives guidelines for the architecture of the project, also considering processing or computing when processes are admitted (in batch or others). As far as digital is concerned, it is considered that less and less people are thinking about reports oriented to print on paper, relieving its use to give priority to a digital approach, thinking for example of mobile devices. To give an example of the use of technologies with business affinity, the OnMind software platform uses the Node.js environment and the Java virtual machine (JVM programming with Kotlin), both Node.js and Java do not work in a common web hosting, but from virtual machines or services focused on these technologies, it is the same case with .Net, Go and in many cases with Python, in reality, most business application languages. It might seem that this implies discarding a language like PHP that frequently accompanies conventional web hosting and with great acceptance in digital marketing (besides also having purposes for management software), but what we want to indicate is that what is not about cloud computing is not part of projects that are approached with the OnMind method (since it relies on a platform for the cloud and considers addressing processes or services that involve computing capacity), being so, if PHP is used by installing on a machine and equally functional systems are achieved that have business reception, is ultimately subject to the freedoms of a project and the knowledge of the team.

  5. The Japanese “5S” applied in quality. The Japanese theory about business organization and quality is taken into account in the processes called the “5S”: Seiri, Seiton, Seiso, Seiketsu, Shitsuke, something like sort, set, shine, standardise, sustain (about discipline)). In a broad view it is a cross-cutting issue, since this theory can be applied to work places, to an office, even to everyday life. As far as our interest is concerned, as far as the quality of the software is concerned it is welcomed by applying it with compound expressions, as follows: to separate unnecessary (classification and discard), to locate necessary (order), to suppress obsolete (cleanliness), to follow standard (to standardize or to solve anomalies), to supervise commitment in function of service and/or product (discipline).

  6. Simple way to test or review point. If we are trying to simplify or admit agile projects in a coherent way, some demands should be smaller taking into account a smaller scope or duration, that is to say, just as in a large project a great deal of time is invested in planning and in the quality of the service or product for a larger dimension, in an agile one a smaller dimension could be considered, or a scope could be approved and if a greater level of demand is required lead to outsourcing of tests (additional management with another supplier, even specialized). According to the work team or the technology, the simplest path for testing should be defined, i.e. whether code level tests are implemented by the developer or checklists are used, which have been welcomed over the years for verification of activities in general. If, for example, programming unit tests means a contribution to the automation of the development process or implementing robots translates into real support, it is clear that this would be the way forward, otherwise checklists can be perfectly considered, or a simple review point that indicates whether the functionality meets the requirement or not. The OnMind method is pronounced in favor of the simplicity, productivity and creativity in the software, if necessary it could be considered the practice of programming in pairs, or, that a resource with the technical role performs a verification to another one of appropriate role within the work team. The OnMind method also opens the way to incorporate introduced or experienced resources without a university degree (just with high school), so that an assistant could be designated for the unit testing function of the programs coded by expert developers, or to do verification with a checklist. The fact that someone else does these tests implies a different point of view that suggests control and the developer continues to enjoy creativity or what best designates his function achieving better productivity. In addition, this emphasizes that creativity and productivity influence quality. Not necessarily the use of lists is something exclusive, it could also be considered something mixed, for example, that depending on the sensitivity of a function, sometimes unit tests are implemented with code and in the other cases a review point that indicates whether the functionality complies with the requirement approach (with a yes or a general no, given the case some observation). On the other hand, if other type of specialized tests are required, such as penetration due to vulnerabilities when exposing a service through the Internet, it should be considered as an additional factor pointing to outsourcing, that is, leaving this to an expert in the subject and reviewing whether it is included in the scope by means of subcontracting or simply being attentive according to the respective support, the latter has more coherence with an agile method if a development delivery is understood as a milestone without specialties. On the other hand, the client or user would be invited to receive the delivery by doing their own validation or having a contractor for this, being a participant in the review point.

  7. Supported by a platform such as OnMind or MODE (which enables operable prototypes). We introduce the acronym MODE, which means “Management Oriented Data Environment”. What is a MODE? A MODE would be the category for a cloud platform that overlaps the operating system, even a programming environment or platform (e.g., Node.js, the Java virtual machine, or .Net), and incorporates aspects of database manager or adapter internally (for example, through an API), better still, a repository that is based on archetypes, also providing functions (components) or some services (for example, user management and others) that can be useful to adapt new functions without investing the time required for development from scratch. Given their capabilities, it is possible in about half (or more) the implementation (coding) of operable prototypes (pages or screens that may work to some extent) to provide a better understanding of what is being done. However, this could be achieved by some existing tool in the market, hence the most significant difference is that it is based on the OnMind method, being designed to support its application.

Summarizing the contribution of OnMind, there is an integrating and unifying sense at the bottom, to a certain extent holistic, considers intuition in management and tolerable risk, seeks a certain simplicity or at least less complexity, can observe the concept of archetypes and their hierarchies, raises a repository that enables a database manager or adaptor, or a MODE that enables operable prototypes based on a specification (of an archetype making), and is also a factor of innovation the fact of incorporating the use of mind maps to simplify the analysis. It is designed to admit micro-projects or developments of a freelance professional (reinforcing the validation of the delivery by the client), passing to work teams and companies that welcome or sympathize with the proposed elements and fundamentals (and that can be personalized or adapted).

Otherwise, we can cite generalities of what is not part of the OnMind method, as well:

  1. Relational databases suggest the need for a certain diagram (entity-relationship or DER), while in the analysis and design under the OnMind method no referential restriction or persistent relationships are imposed, opening up NoSQL databases (or engines such as Aria or MyRocks) and promoting the use of hierarchical diagrams for relationships, the use of conventional diagrams for the representation of the database is unnecessary and inappropriate in some cases, however, it may be feasible and comparable the use of entity diagrams in relation to a custom, difficulty with a change of mentality, or simply because of some need.
  2. UML diagrams are not a priority for OnMind, nor are they completely discarded considering their use.
  3. The OnMind method is born for modern projects and in the cloud, with infrastructure, discarding technologies of lesser scope, for example, what is known as conventional web hosting (or web hosting) is not considered in the cloud computing, although it has its application and reception for a different approach.
  4. By opening, the OnMind software platform is not imposed, although it is promoted since it is aligned and has given rise to the method (in addition to being the first MODE).
  5. While preference is given or analysis is centered using mind maps (with tools that are already developed) and a MODE (Management Oriented Data Environment), no other type of tools or technologies such as “Business Process Management” (BPM) are required. Primarily, notation is not required for workflows (or BPMN) as the method seeks to preserve greater simplicity and interdisciplinary sense with respect to this issue. This point has already been dealt with under the title “Aspect of analysis and design of information systems (A&D)”.
  6. No type of traditional certification is part of the OnMind method, being something free to welcome by effects of a remarkable quality or recognized in conventional contexts. In this sense, the aim of the method is to reduce barriers, nor is it a question of removing them completely because in a technical matter some barriers can be admitted.

8. How do the elements interact or how is the method applied?

To refer to agile projects, be they micro-projects or short phase projects, the scope must be well defined to give an account of a concrete deliverable, for example, by requirement or specific need. We would also be talking about a cycle with a shorter extension of time (or duration) even if its instances are several, and if this is the case with iterations, either for maintenance reasons or to continue with another phase (or next micro-project). Without being strict (for example, with the analysis) The cycle considers instances or aspects such as:

At the work team level, resource planning is reviewed by individually landing tasks (with the Kanban board or similar) and a notion of each other’s work is given when it is related to teamwork, for which meetings are held, recommending a minimum of 1 weekly. As for meetings with stakeholders other than the work team, they can become as frequent as they are advanced or needed, so it is important to have key stakeholders who influence and have space for the event of this type of meetings. Finally, meetings with key stakeholders generally influence the frequency of meetings with the team, as well as valid postponements due to new decisions or changes in the original scope, also bearing in mind that it can generally impact the original amount of a project.

Let’s propose the following example: A pharmaceutical laboratory requires to offer to its medical visitors (staff who promote medical products and are connected with the health professional) that the report of a visit to a doctor is by digital means, giving evolution or formalization of its activity from any site that has access to Internet (mobile data, wifi, etc.). For ease of exercise, no other aspects are incorporated (for example, the route or schedule of visits, or a calendar), however, would be admitting the use of mobile devices to enable the medical visitor to report visits from the site, or from the comfort of your home at the end of your day (or route), if desired. The information that is reported is the date, the shift that corresponds to the order of attention in the day (it can be without shift or a number, maximum 20), doctor to which it visits, address and a detail of welcomed products (of multiple selection or incorporation). This information is received in a meeting with the client giving his approval to invest in the project as a pilot test in which a 50% advance is agreed for immediate implementation as long as the final estimate.

Basically, what is being indicated is to register an event with specific data that originates around the visits that are made to doctors. It follows that in order to create a digital format for visits, both products and medical information (e.g. doctor’s address) should be managed first. It could be validated with the client (or key stakeholders) if it is admitted that when an unscheduled visit is made, zero (0) is used as a shift to indicate that it is no shift.

If we observe, given the simplicity of the case we already have a definition of the requirement that does not merit even an analysis with mind maps (unless we want to have the context and concept visually for the members of a team or interested when someone does not understand the subject).

For the design installation, if we have the OnMind platform, it is possible to take advantage of its repository with reusable archetypes or archetypes that give reason for some elements. For example, if you have an archetype “Contacts” we could use it for a doctor’s information, and if you have archetype “Items” we could use it for product information. With the OnMind platform you can implement a directory for Doctors, you would have the management of products, users of visitors (you could also evaluate a directory for visitors) and could also define a format that can be conditioned with the application of requests, in this case, the request is an event or visit. Although it requires some code point and above all definition in the repository (required and documented configuration, or deliverable scripts), with the OnMind platform it is possible to present the operable prototype for a review meeting more or less in 3 days of availability (even in 1 day, although with prudence and detail can be 1 week).

Once the prototype has been revised, details can be estimated and reported for the coding instance. When more time is invested in an operable prototype it is possible to advance in these simple cases, validating it or testing it almost as a deliverable, however one runs the risk of losing one day, if in the revision another direction is taken. When there are iterations, if there is little time at risk, this is an investment in the validation of the product that contributes to quality. The leader of the project team, or better yet, who manages the relationship with the client must determine if it is viable, for example, to invest at risk up to 2 days in 1 resource (this could vary if you are working with the client and you know its procedure or level of acceptance) for the elaboration of the prototype or simply to check if the estimate is reported so that the decision can be made and continue.

If something new was identified in a meeting with key stakeholders (or the client), it is also coded and documented both technically and functionally (by updating or revising manuals whoever has that function). In the tests, the coding instance can be returned, even leading to a new review meeting. With the successful tests, if the prototype was delivered in 3 days with few observations, when continuing with the development and the tests end up being 2 more days (in the best of cases), we would have in a working week our deliverable if everything turns out in an ideal way. In order to consider more complex scenarios with processes or other factors involving greater coding, a micro-project could have a prudent delivery time, for example, a minimum month and a half for a resource, which is still a shorter time than other projects.

Regardless of the time to deliver projects, a project amount can still be agreed regardless of time, whether it is for or against, unless valid deferrals are allowed in the method, since it is different if the scope is expanded or something is identified that generates impact or prolongs the project and should be reported from the beginning, or when it is the result of a review meeting that generates a new iteration given some decision that poses another direction (or scope). Thus, if less than a month and a half is taken as the basis, projects could be estimated with a minimum amount corresponding to a month and a half, considering that the tool provides an opportunity benefit for less time or the number of resources is greater than one (1), when it is a work team, or more than one (1) resource, in addition by a percentage of reserve in support or transition (i.e., new iterations that must be estimated, for example with 20% of the time reported). However, this is already a matter of cost and project estimation that is mentioned around the context of the method but does not correspond to its dynamics.

In fact, if a scenario or case is found that cannot be supported or exploited, for example, when more than 6 months are estimated, it is likely to have to be approached with a different methodology, even one different from the agile ones, in which case it is highly probable that the project will be close to the year (that is, much more than 6 months). This is identified by experience.

In summary, there are some instances (or microphases) to address the scenario of a micro-project, which is addressed as soon as possible from an event or initial meeting and in which the endorsement is given to initiate something concrete (the analysis and definition of the requirement or requirements) and in general terms by agreeing an initial percentage for advance payment (we are not talking here about an amount), can be seen as an order of execution of the project thus having a record of initiation. As long as a design with operable prototypes is viable, in the following meeting requirements and scope are validated, for which it is prudent to have a diagnosis prepared in which an estimate can be reported with the delivery commitment date of not varying the scope. With the approval and the initial payment the activities and following meeting are programmed, thus until the event of delivery.

9. About the OnMind management tool (by the same Author)

The original project that dates back to 2014 (although it picked up the vision of a personal journey 2 decades ago) was also called OnMind. It is in the context of producing applications where data (or technological infrastructure) are involved, giving rise to the reception of diverse fields and companies, as an added value …

OnMind, more than a modern support tool for management or collaboration, is an adaptable platform to ignite business ideas with a digital experience.

In context, we host and create “apps” or projects involving business activities, internet and mobile devices. Our platform is multi-purpose, ideas take us to the specific, adapting the platform under micro-projects. Being sophisticated, we catalogue it as “Management Oriented Data Environment” (or Mission…), with the acronym MODE.

You could think of it as an operable system for the cloud with a suite of applications for business and office.

What causes a software to be catalogued as MODE?

On the basis of a system (such as Linux) is linked our platform with which you can manage your service or procedures, ie, it is possible to integrate and orchestrate business activity, mainly if operated over the Internet and mobile devices are used.

A MODE provides a new level by taking advantage of some features of a server operating system (specialized machines or computers) inspired by the cloud, although it can operate on a local network. In addition, our MODE is designed to support projects aligned with the OnMind method. In other words, a complement or tool for the method is to have a “Management Oriented Data Environment” (MODE) such as the OnMind platform.

At the same time, the main characteristic of a MODE is to follow and support the OnMind method (based on archetypes and enabling operable prototypes that can run under a standard with some functions available), which generates a technical impact and mentality change in the design or data model of the platform or data environment. As a secondary aspect, it would be to have a series of functions available as a base to facilitate an agile advance in software development, but there may be another tool on the market that does something similar, so it would not be a definitive feature to catalog a software such as MODE.

This is why a MODE is not intended to be an absolute substitute but rather an alternative proposal that is welcomed in an open mentality and vision, with a technical layer overlaid on an operating system of servers operating in the cloud to facilitate its operation. In an idealistic sense, this could also translate into a better life for those who operate a platform, whether in technical, functional or management roles.

Other OnMind MODE features

You could think of it as an operable system for the cloud with a suite of applications for business and office.

We have our repertory of applications, the ones that best distinguish us are “attention to requests”(CRM) and “private web publisher” (for digital documentation or texts), plus other applications to manage your business that you can find in our store according to the plan.

As premises, our platform is multi-purpose, consists of a base produced (between 2015 and january 2020), has a repertoire of applications, a visual standard, web components, there are dynamic functionalities, configurable or parameterizable components, is based on schemes or models applied, formats or forms can consist of definitions and design arrangements established thanks to the platform.

With our platform or MODE, you basically require Internet access and a browser, or our OnMind-AVE “app” (optional for the Cloud). You can consult in detail the technical features on the site: https://onmind.co/go/app/land.html#/info

Thank you for reading

https://onmind.co