首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics >Canvas Deceiver - A New Defense Mechanism Against Canvas Fingerprinting
【24h】

Canvas Deceiver - A New Defense Mechanism Against Canvas Fingerprinting

机译:Canvas Deceiver - 针对帆布指纹识别的新防御机制

获取原文
       

摘要

In our daily practice as management consultants we observe disorientation, misconceptions, and open questions about the suitability, limitations, and/or benefits of novel management approaches. Certainly, there is a strong demand for up-to-date management practices, though at the same time there exist the dangers of misuse and misleading expectations, not necessarily from malice but rather, according to our experience, from lack of self-observation. In this context, second-order concepts are revealed to be useful and solution-oriented. Even though in literature we can find approaches to distinguish first-order cybernetics (FOC) from second-order cybernetics (SOC), none of those focus on organizations as social living systems or the organization's basic operation decision making. Consequently, in this paper we discuss the essential ideas of SOC-based management methods and tools, focusing on the dissimilarities of posture and potential performance of these concepts. To contrast them, we compare Design Thinking with Comparative Systemic (CS) Management, two concepts that use SOC ideas, with two well-known FOC management approaches the Plan-Do-Check-Act-Cycle (PDCA Cycle) and Systems Dynamics. Finally, we present the fundamental differences between FOC and SOC based decision making in management. Basically, we differentiate between concepts based on FOC or SOC by means of three modes of action how they propose to coordinate (temporal dimension), structure (factual dimension), or legitimate (social dimension) decisions.
机译:在我们的日常练习中,作为管理顾问,我们观察了对新型管理方法的适当性,局限性和/或利益的迷失方,误解和开放问题。当然,对最新的管理实践有很强的需求,尽管与此同时存在滥用和误导性期望的危险,而不是根据我们的经验,从缺乏自我观察,不一定来自恶意。在这种情况下,第二阶概念被揭示为有用和面向解决方案。即使在文学中,我们也可以找到从二阶争论者(SoC)的一阶控制论(Foc)的方法,这些方法都没有关注组织作为社会生活系统或组织的基本操作决策。因此,在本文中,我们讨论了基于SoC的管理方法和工具的基本思路,专注于这些概念的姿势和潜在性能的差异。为了对比,我们将设计思维与比较系统(CS)管理进行比较,两个使用SoC思想的两个概念,两个知名的Foc管理方法方法接近Plan-Do-Check-Act-Cycle(PDCA周期)和系统动态。最后,我们介绍了焦点与管理中的SoC决策之间的根本差异。基本上,我们通过三种行动方式分辨基于Foc或SoC的概念,他们如何建议协调(时间维度),结构(事实维)或合法(社会维度)决策。

著录项

获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号