Imagination Management

The imagination construct fosters a never-ending inquisitiveness for the brilliant minds to embark on a tangible and intangible invention. The success of the imagination conceptualization has resulted into revolutionized intellectual birth time and again; clearly evident from its life. The theory acclaimed recognition by Albert Enistein words; where he mentioned imagination as a triumph over knowledge because of its limitless properties.

The ground breaking excogitation repercussions right from the beginning of the world stimulates intellectual wonderment. As what is the right source of final knowledge production which turns into patents and scientific inventions? Does the source come from observation of the existent reality or imagination of the non-existent?

The pragmatism of the current settings provides evidence of unacceptability of the established systems. For example, the intellectual theorists, scholars worldwide, the scientific knowledge acquirers favor discussions, debates and questioning which reflects their thirst for epistemology. Specifically, a need for change is observed through refusal of the theories which back the world renowned systems e.g. the educational system, the governance system and the organizational system. That means the brilliant minds in today’s time, continuously strive to contribute towards body of knowledge by implementing the truth and eliminating the false via observation, questioning and observation.

Therefore, this blog post is trying to find out what is the right source of final knowledge production? Is it observation of the realism structures or imagination of the non-prevailing and non-existent reality?

Ø  The scientific idea of transforming the chemical of silicon into a chip and integration of circuits was an adventurous journey of idea formation via observation and imagination. For example, German Engineer Werner Jacobi back in 1949 first developed the integrated circuit which turned into a complete product in year 2000 by Jack Kilby. The journey did not end up here; the product was further improved by Robert Noyce who made the product more beneficial.

Ø  In another instance, to organize the land and establishment of settlements on the coast of North America, Virginia Company was formed and chartered by James VI in year 1606. This was the first ever company in the world.

By examining and operationalizing the two examples, we can draw following inferences to achieve deeper insights on the questions raised.

Ø  Our way of thinking, responding, perceiving and understanding is either dependent upon our stagnant learning during our past life or self-decidedly questioning our own attitude, thinking behavior and action in order to achieve new wisdom, new learning and new mental capabilities.

Ø  The theoretical underpinning leads to further exploration of the conceptualization. For example; in the case of integrated circuits, the initial observation of the resource presence lead to Silicon discovery and further was imagined by a brilliant mind to be used in a chip containing millions of electronic components. In the case of organization establishment, the need was first observed to manage the land and an idea of a proper company was imagined to execute the purpose of the need.

Ø  Change is one of the most important factors which further emphasize on the construct of imagination. For example, when it will be used excessively, a denial of the core realities would occur simultaneously e.g. the stagnant time movement provides reasoning that nothing remains still forever so things must get improved and altered to suit the human needs with passing time. In the case of integrated circuits, we can observe that the final product was made in result to a complete journey of previous patents and ideas introduced by set of brilliant minds. The product lived a journey of improvement and alteration. Therefore, the construct of change leads to imagination because the reality changes and so do the reality observational patterns.

Ø  Human’s self-perceptional knowledge provides a system for imagination to process itself and produces an idea.

Ø  The same idea is then manufactured as an action to produce the final invention.

Therefore, there is certainly a need to manage the imagination and to focus on how it could be done effectively to achieve effective results. In conclusion, this blog post introduces new concept of ‘’Imagination Management’’ which includes networking and partnership with observation resulting into knowledge; which in turn fosters inquisitiveness of the established realities which would again lead to imagination. This could be best explained by the conceptual model given below.

 Do you trust team-work?

The emphasis on team work has always been largely focused in almost all industries. Many team-work theories are into practice by world renowned organizations e.g. Intel, HP etc. Trust is granted as a key towards product success at almost all stages of ''New Product Development'',  Team work refer towards individuals involvement in a certain task via effective brain storming and sharing of ideas. Recent research-work emphasizes on trust existence in knowledge-sharing setups. Researchers are of the view that non-existence of trust may not make sharing of ideas successful. Hence, trust is mandatory to be able to work in a team as it lead towards employees being more productive. Vast amount of literature in sociology and psychology treats trust as a multidimensional concept such as it has both dimensions of affect and cognition. 

Can team-work exist in a set-up where the cause and effect is based on evil-structure? 

The evil-structure is such like where if you put greater amounts of lie, dishonesty, destructive-thinking, injustice, brutality into your work; you will get greater intrinsic and extrinsic rewards such like promotions, recognition,  pious titles, tax relaxations, governmental support and so on.

The originality of the team-work would vanish if the individuals with evil intentions and behavior execute their daily tasks. But its of a great significance to explore if individuals with evil intentions do understand the essence of a team work. Its interesting to see that if they really do understand it then how do they actually follow or implement it.


How could team-work be like in an evil-structure?

Lets consider example of an organization which is based on an evil structure. An organization where injustice defeat justice, where recognition is awarded to individuals who win by organizational politics and where there is excessive corruption. So let suppose that organization is a university where where one department is responsible to conduct internationally-approved tests. A team is organized to initiate this task. To document a complete procedure, manager assigns task to an employee ''A'' to organize a meeting with his team to have a discussion on increasing prospective student’s applications for the test.

During the discussion session; team members talk about ways to attract number of prospective students. However, team member ''B'' shares a problem they might face. He shares that gaing maximum number of students is difficult because there are number of other test organizers in the same region who have better quality record. Therefore, it might not be easy to beat competitors. Another team member jumps in and gives a solution. He says that if we give some incentive to prospective students they might register with us; for example providing help to students during the test.  Maximum number of team members agree to this idea. However, team member ''C'' calls this idea as unfair and illegal. All team members try to convince him that increase in student’s applications will eventually leads to your own increase in salary and you will be given commission and many other incentives. They further explain that its really easy to hide illegal activities.  Team member ''C'' still remain unconvinved and shows his disagreement. Eventually, he was asked by the management either to be part of it or to quit the job. Unfortunately, he did not fit in the evil structure and ended up loosing his job. However, rest of the team members carried on with their task and worked excessively to attract prospective students by mentioning that help would be provided during the test. 

There are number of things we can observe from such an example. Team members worked and accomplished the task. However, their motivation behind the task was quick and excessive money. Team members of an evil structure do realize how to help other member of the same mind-set. Evil-ideas are shared with honesty and evil behaviors are performed with excessive hard work . This indicates that team work does not really require honest intentions. They may have been addressed as winners but brought some serious negative impacts on humanity. Team members in an evil structure contributed towards university's well-being and society as a whole. Their contributions mainly include:

-Increase in students’ applications
-Increase in profit
-Increase in university’s ranking

-Increase in positive feedback by the students

-Increase in evil contribution towards society

-Increase in oppressing the minority rights

-Increase in oppressing the hardworking students appeared during the test

-Increase in oppressing the hardworking and honest employees
-Increase in creation of lobbies
-Increase in back-stabbing and politics

In natural sciences, for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction but does that hold true for social sciences as well?

A manifested realism verifies that citizens of the country belonging to either private or public sector, from any status class or from any scientific or social field are exposed to communication and dealing. Either excessively or insufficiently/ extrovertly or introvertly; a student, an employee, a politician, a business man, a servant, a priest, a victim all communicates and deals with people in their melting pots. The dealing with the world is a psychodynamic nexus in reciprocation to unrighteous and righteous behavioural settings.

Every human on the planet has similar reactions based on the command of his organic self-perception knowledge e.g. good would be taken as good and bad as bad until evil temptations occur and changes the natural mind settings into deliberate virtue transgression. Therefore, does human behavior always have equivalent reaction to every action e.g. to kindness as being kind, to cruelty as being cruel, to wickedness as being wicked, to destruction as being destructive and will such ‘’behavioral equations’’ are justified?

To answer this, one might get into much more inquisitiveness; for instance is raising voice against injustice is violence? Is giving reasoning for a failure should be interpreted as an excuse for non-accomplishment? Is defending oneself is a weak reaction to questioning? Is talking about your right publicly shows you’re aggressive? Is giving up always show weakness? Is the attitude for the rich should be arrogance? Is the attitude for the poor should be merciful?

An insight to this concept absolutely smashes the balanced behavioral equation to the highest degree. But how? Lets review the different human roles on the planet. For example, a competent employee witness enormous politics in an organizational set-up for a long time which has affected his promotion and recognition rewards. He decides to talk to his boss about it but boss refuses all the evidences he puts forward because he trusts the majority staff’s opinion over him and disregard what the employee says. Employee now have two ways to handle politics either to surrender and be part of the politics by playing politics in return or be a whistleblower and act against injustice. If he starts playing politics the reasons could be the job insecurity, the status quo, the tangible respect for the position he holds in society, the salary he receives at the end of the month and the internal psychodynamic weakness to be an evil to handle evil. If he fights back the politics, the reasons could be being truthful, to raise voice against injustice, to break the unjust system. Whatever he chooses between the two options; the different number of reasoning itself proves that there is no such thing as monotonousness of a human reaction to the environmental influences, attacks and welcomes.

In another instance, suppose a nation has been suffering a barbaric ruler for 50 years and their ancestors died bemoaning but could not remonstrate to make him step down, it further has undergone unemployment, inflation, excessive taxation, ruined facilities, ruined infrastructure, tarnished image, rising poverty rates and other derogatory occurrences. If the nation under effective leader supervision, come on roads fighting for their rights and repeatedly perform such an act until their demands are fulfilled; does that really mean the nation is not democratically right, lacks vision, lacks acceptance of the government as a whole, or are they collectively violent influenced by the current reverberating effect of collective protest intellectualism? The whole nation protestation for their rights has dominance over creating a collective change which fosters new ideologies and new mind sets as an achievement consequence. So in this very case, every action or step taken by the brutal and barbaric government for snatching rights must have an equal reaction by the nation in the form of immense expostulation. However, can we also propose that democracy is always right and people exactly know whom they are to elect? The whole world population has different religions or no religions, have different perceptions and different ways of doing things; suppose if the whole planet population had to elect one president of the entire world; were they able to have consensus in doing so? Apparently no! Because of the excessive diversification in views and thinking patterns which is further translated into religions, cultures and lifestyles. Islamic history states that many prophets were rejected by the people of their times but prophets were themselves right in their originality. Therefore, democracy is always not the answer in times of collective ignorance and in a structure of corruption and deceit.

In conclusion, we may confirm that similar to natural sciences; social sciences explain the same principle of having an equal and opposite reaction to every action rather than only equalized reactions to behavioral actions. 

---Does forgiveness mean forgetting?

Forgiveness and its benefits have largely been argued and discussed in the human psychology literature and holy books of different religions and religious dissimilar classifications. The authors posit if you forgive others, you actually provide yourself relief by forgetting their deeds, conducts, names and identifications. While religious books encouraged forgiveness because it will be useful and constructive for a person internal growth of peace and harmony and there are rewards for those who pardon others. By this information, it is easily observable that forgiveness has been associated with forgetting the deeds of the guilty or in other words, both forgiveness and forgetting are understood in interchangeable sense by the reader. Therefore, both the words could foster interpretation errors at the outset.

Should we think that forgiveness and forgetting are both similar concepts in the context of pardoning others?

Let’s explore if it really holds true.

Suppose there are two persons, A and C. Their personality attributes are unknown and it’s not confirm whether they are inflexible, angry, calm or tranquil but A’s present life productions show that he has some tangible achievements and received full credits for all his works whereas C is not working or studying. There is one similarity among their past life which reveals that both of them have gone through the most traumatic situations, encounter massive criticism, people even damaged their work and repeatedly tried to tarnish their image plus put them in financial crises, insulted them publicly and played politics against them at every step so precisely they all have been unfortunate who were not blessed with that much of a successful life because of peak of failures and falls in their lives previously.

If we also go through the same situations they have been into; should we think of forgiving people who ruined our lives or forgetting what they did to us?

Let’s see what both of them have to say about forgiving their enemies--

A’s response: I have heard from my surroundings so many times that forgiveness give oneself relief and makes oneself forget the pains attached with the past relationship. I personally appreciate whatever I listen and those people ideology as well who reassure forgiveness but I was completely unsuccessful when I myself tried to do this. I mean I really thought to forgive my enemies and forget about them. Forgetting was hell of a difficult task. They used to pop up on my mind whenever I see similar situations in a movie, or when I was reading a book and watching news. One day I went on a party and I saw one of the individuals with whom I had abandoned all my connections. I thought I might have forgiven this guy but no! The time I saw him, his wrongdoings literally started revolving around my head. The way he used to see and talk made me realize he is dangerous. I started ignoring his presence also. Now I think I could not even forget him neither forgive him otherwise I at least had shaken hands with him.

C’s response: I disagree completely with whatever I have heard about forgiveness. There is just no point of forgiving people who make your life absolutely miserable. But since I am quiet religious so I thought to go ahead with that. I started overlooking the deeds of the people but with the heavy heart and so I tried to reestablish my connections with my enemies. I just couldn't forget all the damages they caused me but I approached them and offered my friendship all-over again. But since they are in my memory so it still hurts me somewhere inside and I further feel it’s not safe to get closer to them too much.

Analysis of A and C's responses:

• A was opened to forgiveness ideologies and tried to practically perform them.
• A tried to forgive but failed.
• A could not forget because all the functions he performed to forget; reminded him more of his past life and the people who were involved in ruining it.
• C did not decide to forgive at the first place because of his reluctance to believe the entire concept. But he did because he was religious.
• By doing so, he was still unsuccessful in making himself forgetting the heart-wrenching people and the events.

We can draw following inferences from the responses made:

• Forgiveness has nothing to do with forgetting your enemies.
• We take into account the way human brain functions. The hardware system fitted on top of our heads does not allow the deletion of memory at all.  We still remember the people whom we met in the past or when we were a child or a teenager. Brain keeps the data of the people either good or bad.
• Things which cause us damages and break us into pieces have higher tendency to remain in our brains.
• Forgiveness which means to reestablish your connections does not have any impact on forgetting the same individuals. Hence, ‘’forgetting enemies’ wrongdoings lowers down the stress level’’ is a big question because in either cases of being friends with them or not, will never make you forget the injuries to your heart and well-being.
• In many cases, having an encounter with your enemies again will rejuvenate everything and you would feel more insecure being with them. This type of decision can increase the chances of having emotional stress.

Note: Both A and C nowhere mentioned they will take revenge therefore decision of not forgiving does not necessarily leads one to take revenge. However, silent retaliation is observed here. Further, human brain amazing quality of keeping long and short memories influenced A and C's decision of forgiving or not forgiving; therefore the concept of fear of enemies cannot be implemented here.

The Success and Surrender of an Intellectual Need

Humans on the face of earth from the beginning changing and improving their life styles; making better clothing to wear, better shelter to live and better food to eat etc. Human’s inherited nature is to explore and discover things, to find an answer to the solution and to think on a certain phenomenon and drive out a meaning from the developed perception. Just like Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein, Warner Brothers, Bill Gates, Steve Job made inventions from their ideas and King of England James VI in year 1606 had first established an organization out of his idea. Apple Inc. which is one of the largest Hitec companies in the world had its first product made by Steve Wozniak who single handedly invented the Apple I computer which lead to microcomputers revolution.  Similarly, Bill Gates made windows through his idea and creativity. Therefore, human beings keep satisfying their need for innovation and founders of these Hitec companies followed the same intellectual self-leadership patters. The marketing literature suggests that product-makers first satisfy their intellectual need for innovation and resultantly produce a brand new thing which might never have been the need of a human being and that performs the role of ‘’Need-Creation’’.

Contradictory to the concept given above, one may say that price and income level needs of a customer are taken into consideration while an organization starts the ‘’New Product Development’’ venture. But in this case as well, the point of concern is to invent a product which ultimately increases the market share is for organization own survival needs. Organizations actually do not sell their products below the cost which has been incurred in making that product. By prospect theory, those organizations which enter into the market and sell their products below the product’s cost, gain to receive bigger market share if the product goes successful; further they aim to increase the price if they will be able to position the product perfectly.

Should we believe that inventors transforming into big businesses perform a negative function by creating the need in longer runs to profit themselves or is it something natural that happens to intellectual human beings when they follow their goals and make their dreams accomplish and their devotion ultimately return them with bigger inventions?

Let’s dig into the concept further by considering an inventor named as Jim.

He is an engineer and recently made the cable bridge and was hired by the Government for that matter. He along with his other staff members completed the project effectively and efficiently. Jim has worked hard on making achieve his target within the time limit; he has been rated high for his pragmatism at the end of the project and now the bridge is beneficial for 1000s of travellers.

Analyzing Jim’s gaining foothold will give clarity of the success model followed by him. This emphasizes on the aspect of discovering the process by which Government recognized Jim’s talents and hired him at the earlier stage. By doing so, it has been found out that Government initially when had tested 60 engineers for this project and reviewed their past performances for their approval, two other engineers scored higher than Jim. The hiring panel decided to give this job to Jim for following reasons:

• One of the member from the evaluation panel thought Jim won’t be an irritation for them in terms of too many demands regarding pay scale issues.
• Jim would benefit the government hiding the secrets which citizens have right to know e.g. unsound working environment for the whole crew.

Studying the case of Jim gives us following insights:

• An inventor, author or a scientist can be brilliant minds which can contribute to the world.
• Their brilliance of mind largely dependent upon the system in which they exist. For example, other two candidates who scored higher than Jim might have shown a personality attribute which lead to the hiring panel eliminating them. That could be anything related to their reactive natures to the environment rather than accepting the reality and adapting it. In the same way, businesses which achieve sustainable competitive advantage/ competitive advantage must be the ones who are adaptive to change and followers of the right strategy change as well but other equally competent businesses if loose the battle; that actually shows they did not accept the system which has a need-creating nature.
• An inventor can be extremely honest regarding his goals and making it a bigger success. However, the cause and effect rules of the system can be a hindrance for them. Like other two candidates did not win the project because of the system (the hiring panel); whereas the same system was beneficial for Jim. All three of them were capable in terms of their performances but their own intellectual needs have made them choosing the right or wrong paths to make their goals accomplish. And deciding for the right system ultimately.
• It further indicates, product innovation is the need of the organization first, creating the need, integrate the product into marketing communications and once the product’s need is recognized; the organization is be able to become whether market-driven or market driving. For example, it starts creating the change by competing and all the organizations while compete, keep on impacting on customer’s need recognition at every step.
• In answer to competition, organizations further should have capabilities to handle the change and if can survive in highly changing environments, be able to produce more resources which will further enable them to make more innovative products. Such innovative products will keep creating the need or might serve as ground-breaking inventions as well but such inventions in general do not have power to change the inhuman-system or bring any improvements to human welfare. Therefore, ones capabilities in a certain field really do not have any impact on alteration of other errors in one’s personality.

Insights into happiness of a common citizen of the world 

For centuries there is an unstoppable inquisitiveness in exploring the sources of human’s gratification and felicity. This is evident from the philosophy, sociology, psychology, biology, economics, business, literature, culture and all other subjective fields where authors and scientists have put their best efforts in finding treasures of knowledge either to prove their own occult desire for doing so or to provide benefit to the humanity at large where provision of benefits are correlated with attainment of complacency. For instance, Harvard Business Review’s famous article ‘’How will you measure your life’’ has been read the most after its publication which had its focus on how can final graduate students would make sure they find happiness in their careers. Further, right from the ancient history BCE; where author Ebers Papyrus addressed the issue of clinical depression till twenty-first century where American Psychiatric Association (APA) is still exploring ‘’mental disorders’’ prove the fact that quest for happy survival is foremost and momentous interest and need for the mankind.

Human tears and smile provides biological reasoning behind different emotional states. It’s an apparent observation that human’s happiness is dependent on positive life events; it’s abundantly clear from this that if one goes through the most traumatic stages of life will definitely shed tears. However, how can an emotional state be controlled and turned into one’s favor where internal responsive system is programmed in such a way that comes in terms with the one’s psychodynamics further translating into a smile in nature-contradicting events.

The answer to this lies in how human does the self-evaluation which functions as his responsive system to different set of circumstances. Self-evaluation in terms of one’s action could either be naturally/randomly or rationally performed.

Let’s consider human self-evaluation patterns. We all evaluate our current identities with respect to our self-perception knowledge, societal-perception knowledge, jurisprudence knowledge, religious knowledge or psychological knowledge. The self-perception knowledge is all composed of a variety system where its influenced by all other knowledges time to time and which existence is inevitable.

How a common citizen from any status class performs the self-evaluation to achieve complacency where the environment and world system is largely ‘’corruptionally composed’’ as quoted by various journalists in talk shows and newspapers and common people in college/ university café-terias, hotels, huts, family gatherings, offices etc.

Lets consider different human roles on the planet:

An M.Phill student who has to produce researches in order to prove his credibility as a researcher in a particular field suppose is a highest CGPA scorer in his previous degree and now carry a study to publish it in an impact-factor journal. He completes the empirical study after following paid data-collection methods with full dedication but is unhappy with the results which neither prove the hypothesis made nor goes with the theoretical framework of the study. The student with high levels of frustration goes to his supervisor and asks for a help. The supervisor is in a permanent faculty of a renowned university advises him – ‘’I understand you have put hardwork and theoretical framework is absolutely a new-knowledge creation but my experience tells me that you need to manipulate the results a bit to support the theory because it will get published without any criticisms from the reviewer of the highly impact-factor journal’’ A student listens carefully to the supervisor and acts accordingly.

The student perceives himself as a contributive being to the body of knowledge. The society further has influenced him while he acted upon supervisor’s advice and changed the original results of the study; which will make his study published and would increase his worth as a researcher. Therefore, self-perception knowledge after being influenced by societal-perception knowledge is bringing a positive evaluation of his own self further bringing a smile on his face which is a sign of complacency. This self-evaluation of this student would be criticized by those people who evaluate the environment with respect to either religious or psychological knowledge. They might say that student’s gratification is an achievement but attained by wrong means; further falsely interpreted by student himself as a right decision; which is known as ignorance in other words.

In another instance, a lady who runs a beauty parlor put second-beat quality products. In her self-evaluation; she perceives she is doing good work by fulfilling people demand. Somewhere her past-life experiences made her learn the society is more fashion and beauty conscious that it becomes vulnerable without cognitive evaluations of the beauty- services. People evaluating with respect to jurisprudence knowledge might question the mission and practice of such services. However, same like the previous case; the owner of the parlor is satisfied with what she is doing.

Happiness and having that smile on your face makes you beautiful, achieving something in life is beautiful but the pragmatism of a peaceful life describes a different story. Many Africans live their lives without clothes and in hot environments with unhappy faces. Prisoners who were victims of genocide wrote great books and showed the world many dimensions towards understanding of life. They were apparently not happy because of the many ruined precious years in confinement. Happiness may not be the aim of a large population on the face of earth. In fact, aim's reality is to creat something with truth and honesty. When you are truthful; it’s confirmed you would have to work extreme harder, encounter violent opposition, getting into controversies and massive criticisms. The presence of all of them in life-processes might teach and make you learn excessively; the learning which will serve as a great resource for a change in the world tomorrow. By then your life would become revolution and your aims would become the collective reality on which the universe is based upon which might bring storm of failures and disappointments and very little happiness in the end.

VERITY OF TRUTH AND FALSEHOOD

Should we beware of false knowledge?

Many theories are negated when new are introduced or come into practice. Theories evolve, change and grow. Therefore, knowledge can be false initially and lives a journey towards advancement and improvement but this is how things are, time changes so do the ideas and human beings’ brain capabilities. It’s better to break the chains of self-imprisonment and be open to false things to find better ways for truth-discovery.