I just arrived at unfamiliar Seoul.

September 30, 2008 by Dustin

I just arrived at unfamiliar Seoul



I thought I felt like I had a dream of summer when I just arrived at Seoul.
However, I wanted to change my mind.
토론토에서 영어공부를 하던 순간들이 너무 그리웠다.
그 곳의 문화가 그리웠다.
하지만 이젠 바뀌어야한다는 것을 안다.
언제까지 그 곳을 그리워하며 살 순 없다.
싫으나 좋으나 이 곳이 내가 사는 곳이니깐.

Filed under having 0 comments  

How was Korea divided after World War 2?

September 21, 2008 by Dustin

End of World War II (1939�1945) World War II

In November 1943, Franklin Roosevelt, Winston Churchill and Chiang Kai-shek met at the Cairo Conference to discuss what should happen to Japan's colonies, and agreed that Japan should lose all the territories it had conquered by force. In the declaration after this conference, Korea was mentioned for the first time. The three powers declared that they, "mindful of the enslavement of the people of Korea are determined that in due course Korea shall become free and independent.� For some Korean nationalists who wanted immediate independence, the phrase "in due course" was cause for dismay. Roosevelt may have proposed to Stalin that 30 or 40 years elapse before full Korean independence; Stalin demurred, saying that a shorter period of time would be desirable. In any case, discussion of Korea among the Allies would not resume until victory over Japan was nearly imminent.

With the war's end in sight in August 1945, there was still no consensus on Korea's fate among Allied leaders. Many Koreans on the peninsula had made their own plans for the future of Korea, and few of these plans included the re-occupation of Korea by foreign forces. In accordance with a policy suggested by the US to the Soviet Union, the Russians declared war on Japan and moved their military forces into northeastern China and northern Korea. However, the American leaders worried that the whole peninsula might be occupied by the Soviet Union, and feared this might lead to a Soviet occupation of Japan. Later events showed these fears to be unfounded. The Soviet forces would arrive in Korea before the American forces, but they occupied only the northern part of the peninsula, halting their advance at the 38th parallel, which was in keeping with their agreement with the United States. On August 10, 1945 two young officers � Dean Rusk and Charles Bonesteel � were assigned the task of creating an American occupation zone. Working on extremely short notice and completely unprepared for the task, they used a National Geographic map to decide on the 38th parallel; they chose it because it divided the country approximately in half but would leave the capital Seoul under American control. No experts on Korea were consulted and the two men were unaware that forty years previous, Japan and Russia had discussed sharing Korea along the same parallel; Rusk later said that had he known, he would have chosen a different line. Regardless, the decision was hastily written into General Order Number One for the administration of postwar Japan.

As a colony of Japan, the Korean people had been systematically excluded from important posts in the administration of Korea. The general Abe Nobuyuki, the last Japanese Governor-General of Korea, was in contact with a number of influential Koreans since the beginning of August 1945 to prepare the hand-over of power. On August 15, 1945, Yo Un Hyong, a moderate left-wing politician, agreed to take over. He was in charge of preparing the creation of a new country and worked hard to build governmental structures. On September 6, 1945, a congress of representatives was convened in Seoul. The foundation of a modern Korean state took place just three weeks after Japan's capitulation. The government was predominantly left wing, caused in part by the many resistance fighters who agreed with many of communism's views on imperialism and colonialism.

After World War II

In the South Main article: United States Army Military Government in Korea On September 7, 1945, General MacArthur announced that Lieutenant General John R. Hodge was to administer Korean affairs, and Hodge landed in Incheon with his troops the next day. The "Provisional Government of the Republic of Korea" sent a delegation with three interpreters, but he refused to meet with them.

With their focus overwhelmingly being on Japan, the American military authorities paid much less attention to Korea and soldiers generally did not want to be assigned there. While Japan was put under the administration of civilians, Korea was placed under the direct administration of military units. Little changed in the administration of the country; officials then serving under the Japanese authorities remained in their positions. The Japanese governor was not dismissed until the middle of September and many Japanese officials stayed in office until 1946. These decisions angered most Koreans since these same Japanese had helped exploit Koreans. Adding to this anger was the American military's choice to give many governmental positions to Koreans who had betrayed their country by collaborating with the Japanese rulers.

The US occupation authorities in southern Korea viewed many indigenous attempts at government as a communist insurgency and refused to recognize the "Provisional Government". However, an anti-communist named Syngman Rhee, who moved back to Korea after decades of exile in the US, was considered an acceptable candidate to provisionally lead the country since he was considered friendly to the US. Meanwhile on August 31, 1946, an editorial in the Chosun Ilbo told Hodge that the deteriorating economy was leaving the Korean people suffering more than any time under Japanese rule. Under Rhee, and often with the knowledge and consent of the American military, the southern government conducted a number of campaigns aimed ostensibly at "removing communism" but that in reality targeted anyone who opposed his rule. Over the course of the next few years, over 100,000 people would lose their lives in these campaigns. [1] In August 1948, Syngman Rhee became the first president of South Korea, and U.S. forces left the peninsula.

[edit] In the North In August 1945 the Soviet Army established the Soviet Civil Authority to rule the country until a domestic regime, friendly to the USSR, could be established. Provisional committees were set up across the country putting Communists into key positions. In March 1946 land reform was instituted as the land from Japanese and collaborator land owners was divided and handed over to poor farmers. Kim Il-sung initiated a sweeping land refrom program in 1946. Organizing the many poor peasants and agricultural laborers under the people's committees a nationwide mass campaign broke the control of the old landed classes. Landlords were allowed to keep only the same amount of land as peasants who had once rented their land, thereby making for a far more equal distribution of land. The north Korean land reform was achieved in a less violent way than that of China or Vietnam. Official American sources stated, "From all accounts, the former village leaders were eliminated as a political force with resort to bloodshed, but extreme care was take to preclude their return to power."[2] This was very popular with the farmers, but caused many collaborators and former landowners to flee to the south where some of the obtained positions in the new south Korean government.

Key industries were nationalized. The economic situation was nearly as difficult in the north as it was in the south, as the Japanese had concentrated agriculture in the south and heavy industry in the north.

In February 1946 a provisional government called the North Korean Provisional People's Committee was formed under Kim Il-sung, who had spent the last years of the war training with Soviet troops in Manchuria. Conflicts and power struggles rose up at the top levels of government in Pyongyang as different aspirants maneuvered to gain positions of power in the new government. At the local levels, people's committees openly attacked collaborators and some landlords, confiscating much of their land and possessions. As a consequence many collaborators and others disappeared or were assassinated. It was out in the provinces and by working with these same people's committees that the eventual leader of North Korea, Kim Il-sung, was able to build a grassroots support system that would lift him to power over his political rivals who had stayed in Pyongyang. Soviet forces departed in 1948.

Establishment of two Koreas With mistrust growing rapidly between the formerly allied United States and Soviet Union, no agreement was reached on how to reconcile the competing provisional governments. The U.S. brought the problem before the United Nations in the fall of 1947. The USSR opposed UN involvement.

The UN passed a resolution on November 14, 1947, declaring that free elections should be held, foreign troops should be withdrawn, and a UN commission for Korea should be created. The Soviet Union, although a member with veto powers, boycotted the voting and did not consider the resolution to be binding.

In April 1948, a conference of organizations from the north and the south met in Pyongyang. This conference produced no results, and the Soviets boycotted the UN-supervised elections in the south. There was no UN supervision of elections in the north. On May 10 the south held elections. Syngman Rhee, who had called for partial elections in the south to consolidate his power as early as 1947, was elected, though left-wing parties boycotted the election. Widespread corruption was reported in the elections and the Republic of Korea began life without a great deal of legitimacy. On August 13, he formally took over power from the U.S. military.

[edit] Korean War In the North, Democratic People's Republic of Korea was declared on September 9, with Kim Il-sung as prime minister. This division of Korea, after more than a millennium of being unified, was seen as unacceptable and temporary by both regimes. From 1948 until the start of the civil war on June 25, 1950, the armed forces of each side engaged in a series of bloody conflicts along the border. In 1950, these conflicts escalated dramatically when North Korean forces attacked South Korea, triggering the Korean War and effectively making the division permanent. An armistice was signed ending hostilities and the two sides agreed to create a three-mile wide buffer zone between the states, where nobody would enter. This area came to be known as the Demilitarized Zone or DMZ.

After the Korean War (1953�present) Main articles: Korean Demilitarized Zone and Korean reunification North and South Korea have never signed a formal peace treaty and thus are still officially at war; only a ceasefire was declared. South Korea's government came to be dominated by its military and a relative peace was punctuated by border skirmishes and assassination attempts. The North failed in several assassination attempts on South Korean leaders, most notably in 1968, 1974 and 1983; tunnels were frequently found under the DMZ and war nearly broke out over the ax-murder incident at Panmunjeom in 1976. In 1973, extremely secret, high-level contacts began to be conducted through the guise of the Red Cross, but ended after the Panmunjeom incident with little progress having been made.

In the late 1990s, with the South having transitioned to democracy, the success of the Nordpolitik policy, and power in the North having been taken up by Kim Il-sung's son Kim Jong-il, the two nations began to engage publicly for the first time, with the South declaring its Sunshine Policy.

Recently, in effort to promote reconciliation, the two Koreas have adopted an unofficial Unification Flag, representing Korea at international sporting events. The South provides the North with significant aid and cooperative economic ventures, and the two governments have cooperated in organizing meetings of separated family members and limited tourism of North Korean sites. However, the two states still do not recognize each other, and the Sunshine Policy remains controversial in South Korea.

The apportionment of responsibility for the division is much debated, although the older generation of South Koreans generally blame the North's communist zeal for instigating the Korean War. Many in the younger generation see it as a byproduct of the Cold War, criticizing the US role in the establishment of separate states, presence of US troops in the South, and hostile policies against the North.

Via WikiAnwers


Filed under , having 0 comments  

Business Thinking Meta Model

by Dustin

Business Thinking Meta Model
Proactive Thinking, Reactive Thinking, and Passive Thinking 



Every year many new business concepts appear and previous concepts disappear.

Which concepts should we pick up?

This report plans to develop a universal model for business thinking. The universal model gives us a higher viewpoint to evaluate business concepts and help us to understand essences of business concepts. This report calls the universal model

the Business Thinking Meta Model

The Business Thinking Meta Model is composed of three thinking patterns such as Proactive Thinking, Reactive Thinking and Passive Thinking. We can think effectively by selecting an appropriate thinking pattern, responding to the purposes of thinking.

The main findings are as follows.

The scope of Thinking:Thinking processes should be isolated from implementation processes. If we consider implementation processes simultaneously, we unconsciously eliminate challenging alternatives. Based on this proposition, this report considers only thinking processes.

The result of the research:We can utilize our thinking power effectively with the Business Thinking Meta Model.

The power of Proactive Thinking:We can escape from causation, which is applicable only under predictable business situations, by adopting mechanical analysis, which is the analysis part of Proactive Thinking and is typically realized by the Lateral Thinking, the Game Theory, and Econometrics.

The power of Reactive Thinking:Causation, which is the analysis part of Reactive Thinking, is the most efficient business thinking method under a predictable condition.

The trap of Passive Thinking:Many business analysis tools are mal-adapted as powerless static frameworks, which only arrange information on formats passively.

We start to understand the Business Thinking Meta Model.

The Business Thinking Meta Model

The Business Thinking Meta Model is composed of three typical thinking approaches such as Proactive Thinking, Reactive Thinking, and Passive Thinking. Further, the Business Thinking Meta Model divides a thinking process into three parts such as Exploring, Analyzing, and Deciding. Each of the three approaches has conceptual terms for each divided thinking process. This three-by-three categorization and nine conceptual terms give us an exhausted recognition about business thinking and systematic selection criteria to pick up one or a combined appropriate thinking approaches. Moreover, by understanding and applying the Business Thinking Meta Model, we can understand the usefulness and limitation of business concepts.

Next, we can see more examinations of the three thinking approaches and newly defined conceptual terms. In order to understand the thinking approaches and utilize the power of them, this report explains the strengths and weaknesses, the requirements, and the adaptations, of the three approaches.

Proactive Thinking: Beyond Causation

We identify the strengths and weaknesses of Proactive Thinking, set the three requirements of proactive thinking and examine several popular business thinking approaches which include Proactive Thinking.

Strengths and Weaknesses of Proactive Thinking

Though Proactive Thinking is a powerful approach to considering uncertain future situations, Proactive Thinking is not a conventional thinking approach. The strengths and weaknesses of Proactive Thinking are as follows.

Strengths

  • Proactive Thinking is useful to break through a current situation.
  • Proactive Thinking is efficient to conceive alternatives.
  • Proactive Thinking is competitive under an uncertain business condition
Weaknesses

  • Results of Proactive Thinking are only possible scenarios, not plausible scenarios
  • Results of Proactive Thinking are less persuasive (because it has no causation).
  • Proactive Thinking is not applicable to daily business thinking (Reactive Thinking is a better alternative).
  • Proactive Thinking is time-consuming.
Requirements

Formulating a new structure, analyzing future possibilities mechanically, and developing contingent scenarios are three requirements of Proactive Thinking.

Meta System Structuring

When we plan to progress beyond a current system, we should think about an environment of the system and a meta environment of the environment. Exploring the wider ranges helps to find new ideas and to develop a new system, which substitutes a current system.

Mechanical Analysis

In order to escape from persistent causal thinking in our mind set, mechanical analysis is required. Edward De Bono1, who is a popular imaginative thinking researcher, conceived "Lateral Thinking," which is a typical mechanical conception method.

Alex Osborn2, who is also a famous imaginative thinking researcher, proposed another mechanical conception method (we call his method the Osborn method). The Osborn method includes adaption, modification, substitution, addition, multiplication, subtraction, division, rearrangemnet, reversal and combination. All these approaches target perspective change.

Further Econometrics and other mathematical models such as break even analysis, the Discount Cash Flow Model, and statistical test models are typical approaches of mechanical analysis.

Contingent decision making

When we think of an uncertain future, contingent planning is powerful. Multiple scenarios are outcomes of contingent decision making. The Game Theory is a typical contingent decision making approach.

Other considerations for Proactive Thinking

Vision

Vision making is thinking in an abstract level. Vision making has Exploring, Analyzing, and Decision Making, in an abstract level. All Proactive Thinking, Reactive Thinking, and Passive Thinking can include vision making.

Importance of a vision is in its nobility, challenging spirit, heroism, and contributing spirit, which encourage members of an organization. Since these aspects relates to the implementation of thinking, vision should be researched with the implementation of thinking.

Intuition

Intuitive conception is frequently recognized as Proactive Thinking, but intuition comes from accumulated experiences. Intuition can eliminate a time-consuming logical causation process but is still based on an empirical mind set.

Time-based competition

Proactive Thinking itself is relatively time-consuming, but after we prepare multiple scenarios, we can respond to environmental changes quickly. Proactive Thinking is time-consuming in a thinking process but agile in an implementation process.

Adaptations of Proactive Thinking

We can see a few Proactive Thinking approaches, but Proactive Thinking is not common as much as Reactive Thinking and Passive Thinking are. As adaptations of Proactive Thinking, this report picked out Michael Porter's Competitive Advantage analysis, Peter Senge's System Thinking approach and Gary Hamel's "Strategy as Revolution" concept.

Porter's Competitive Advantage analysis

Porter's analysis3 is a typical proactive thinking example. But unfortunately his conceptual frameworks are frequently segregated by adopters and each of frameworks is used as an independent and static frame. Further, his scenario analysis, the most powerful tool of his analysis for Proactive Thinking, is not popular, though other frameworks such as the five force model, the generic strategy matrix and the value chain are famous and are frequently adopted for strategy formulation, which should be proactive.

Senge's Systems Thinking approach

Senge4 explained the limitation of a system with escalation and delay, which are built in a system and cause a malfunction in a system. Using escalation and delay, Senge practically proposed an alarm to know the time to develop a new system. New system development is the very proactive thinking. But Senge did not mention clearly the necessity of contingent decision making or multiple scenarios. Contingent decision making or multiple scenarios are requirements for proactive thinking.

Senge also mentioned "Creative Tension" which is an adaptation of a traditional problem solving concept. A traditional problem solving method uses a kind of subtraction to define a problem. The definition is "Ideal Situation - Current Situation = Problem." This formula assumes that a current situation has problems. Senge applied this formula to Proactive Thinking, assuming that a current situation does not have problems. Senge's formula is "Vision - Current Reality = Creative Tension." Senge focused on the proactive side of problem solving.

Hamel's "Strategy as Revolution" concept

Hamel5 mentioned that breaking through accumulated experiences is essential for strategizing. Hamel's strategy is not exclusively a corporate strategy. Hamel emphazied strategic approaches for every business activity. Hamel used a "revolution" as an analogy for a strategic activity. Hamel proposed the importance of proactive thinking but he did not mention how to realize his idea. Proactive Thinking, which we see in this report, can realize Hamel's concept.

Reactive Thinking: Power of Experience

We can see strengths and weaknesses of Proactive Thinking, three requirements of Reactive Thinking and two popular business thinking approaches which include Reactive Thinking.

Strengths and Weaknesses

Reactive Thinking is a popular and efficient problem solving approach, but it is applicable only when business conditions are stable.

Strengths

  • Reactive Thinking is widely applicable (Almost all daily analyses and decision-makings should be based on Reactive Thinking).
  • Reactive Thinking is persuasive (Because Reactive Thinking has causal explanations).
  • Reactive Thinking is powerful when we target continuous improvement
  • Reactive Thinking is time-efficient
Weaknesses

  • Reactive Thinking can not propose drastic changes.
  • Reactive Thinking is powerless when business conditions are uncertain.
Requirements

Setting functional relations, analyzing causation, and developing an optimal solution are three requirements of Reactive Thinking.

Functioning

This report names the thinking process through which we set functional relations of the targeted field "Functioning". Functioning is the first requirement for Reactive Thinking. An analysis process of Reactive Thinking uses the functional relations to find causation. (A set of functional relations is frequently called "system")

Causation

To clarify cause and effect relations of a targeted field is the analysis process of Reactive Thinking, called Causation. Causation is an universal and persuasive analysis method, since most of us are influenced by causation through educational and cultural experiences.

Further, we can find causation only based on our accumulated experiences, which are both direct experiences and secondary experiences. Secondary experiences include informative experiences through reading books, hearing others' experiences, and so on. Since each of us has familiar causation method, finding causation is time-efficient (We are frequently unconscious of our familiar method, but we are influenced by it). But under uncertain business situations, experience-based causation is powerless.

Optimal Decision Making

To find a best solution scenario, which solves the true cause, is the third requirement of Passive Thinking. Since causation can find reliable causes of a problem, though the reliability is not 100 %, we can focus on the causes to find solutions. Therefore our solution can be one scenario, or a set of scenarios, which target the same causes. This report names this type of decision making Optimal Decision Making.

Further, since Optimal Decision Making comes from causal analysis, it is impossible to find a reengineering type of solution. Causal analysis can set only a continuous-improvement type of solution.

Adaptations

We can see many Reactive Thinking approaches. Reactive Thinking is the most popular business thinking. As adaptations of Proactive Thinking, this report picked out KAIZEN method and Charles Kepner's rational thinking.

KAIZEN (Continuous Improvement) method

KAIZEN is a typical Reactive Thinking. KAIZEN is elaborated in Japanese manufacturing companies. In a typical KAIZEN method, front-line workers propose a small change in production system. Their proposals target the improvement of productivity. Even if they think about future improvement, they focus on eliminating inefficiency from their current production systems. They do not think a total system change. Further, they propose one cause of each inefficiency and one solution to the cause. Their approaches are typical Reactive Thinking.

Charles Kepner's rational thinking

One of the founder of the Kepner Torigoe method, Charles Kepner6, mentioned that a solution should be selected among possible alternatives, and that a selection among alternatives is better than a rushed decision making based on the initial idea. Kepner's idea is a combination of Proactive Thinking and Reactive Thinking. Kepner combines contingent decision making with Reactive Thinking, but he recommends picking up one solution. Since Kepner's method is based on an optimal decision making, it is useful only when business conditions are stable.

Passive Thinking:Mal-adaptation of Business Thinking Tools

We can see strengths and weaknesses of Passive Thinking, three requirements of Passive Thinking and adaptations of Passive Thinking.

Strengths and Weaknesses

Passive Thinking can recognize situations but is not useful for decision making.

Strength

  • Passive Thinking is efficient to recognize situations.
Weaknesses

  • Passive Thinking can find neither future possibilities nor causes of past systems.
  • Passive Thinking is easily to misunderstood as adaptations of popular business thinking concepts such as the value chain analysis, SWAT analysis, Life cycle model, and Core competence model, but these adaptations are mere data mappings on certain formats.
Requirements

Setting a frame, which arranges data and possibilities, analyzing the data and possibilities through the frame and deciding with intuition are three requirements of Passive Thinking.

Framing

Making a frame, which is supposed to exhaust existing data and future possibilities, is the required exploration for Passive Thinking. Passive Thinking does not require finding causal relations or a meta system.

Mapping

Verifying whether the proposed frame can exhaust data and possibilities is the required analysis for Passive Thinking. This report calls this process Mapping. In order to verify whether the data and potentials are exhausted or not, the Pyramid Principle and the MECE Principle are conventional. Both principles were mentioned by Barbara Minto7. The Pyramid Principle suggests collecting and arranging data hierarchically. Higher layers include more abstract expressions and lower layers include more concrete expressions. Since we say the same things with different levels of abstraction, arranging information into a hierarchical frame is a powerful method to clarify complex situations. MECE stands for Mutually Exclusive and Collectively Exhaustive. If we can arrange information exhaustively and without double counting in each level of the hierarchy, the way of arrangement is ideal. The Pyramid principle and the MECE principle is useful for Mapping process.

Intuitive Decision making

Since Passive Thinking does not have causal analysis, we can not find causal criteria to pick up one optimal solution in Passive Thinking. Further, since Passive Thinking does not have mechanical conception, we can not find multiple scenarios as Proactive Thinking can find. Therefore Passive Thinking can only depend on intuitions for decision making. Intuitive Decision Making is the third requirement of Passive Thinking. Intuition can go beyond causation but is still influenced by accumulated experiences. Sometimes intuitions work very well, but usually intuitions are clueless. Intuitive Decision Making seems to be practical but is risky.

Adaptations

We can see many Passive Thinking approaches, but frequently Passive Thinking approaches are mis-adaptations of Proactive Thinking or Reactive Thinking. As adaptations of Proactive Thinking, this report picked out Financial Statements and SWAT analysis.

Financial Statements

Financial statements are typical static frames. Even if financial statements exhaust relevant information, financial statements themselves say nothing. In order to know meaningful information from financial statements, we must use Proactive Thinking or Reactive Thinking to predict the future or find cause and effect relations.

SWAT analysis

SWAT analysis is one of the most popular marketing analysis tools. But a SWAT frame is used only for arranging information. After analysts arranged information, they can use only their intuition to formulate action plans.

Conclusion

In an uncertain business situation, which we face these days, Proactive Thinking is most useful. When we use Proactive Thinking, we must watch for the unconscious induction from causation, which comes from accumulated previous experiences. Further, we should recognize that most of our thinking should be Reactive. We do not have to use Proactive Thinking for our daily thinking. Moreover, the easy adaptation of business thinking concepts is apt to be only Passive Thinking and the results become only an arrangement of information. Passive Thinking is useful only for recognizing situations. The next table summarizes three thinking approaches in terms of main usage, applicable situations, required time, and persuasiveness.

Further, we can appropriately utilize business thinking concepts with the Business Thinking Meta Model. We can examine whether the concepts are proactive, reactive or passive by checking how the concepts explore situations, how the concepts analyze issues, and how the concepts make decisions. After the examinations, we can apply the concepts for suitable usage and situations, efficiently and persuasively. 

Summary of Business Thinking approaches



 


Usage

Situation

Time

Persuasiveness


Proactive Thinking


Break through


Unpredictable


Time-consuming


Less persuasive


Reactive Thinking


Continuous Improvement


Predictable


Time-efficient


Persuasive


Passive Thinking


Situation Recognition


Anytime


Time-efficient


Least Persuasive




Note

1 Edward De Bono: Serious Creativity, HarperCollins, New York, 1992

2 Alex Osborn: Applied Imagination, Creative Education Foundation Press, Buffalo, 1993

3 Porter's Analysis: Competitive Advantage, Free Press, New York,1985

4 Senge: The Fifth Discipline, Currency and Doubleday, new York, 1990

5 Hamel: "Strategy as Revolution", Harvard Business review July-August 1996, Boston

6 Charles Kepner: Managing Beyound the Ordinary, Ama Com, New York, 1996

7 Barbara Minto: The Pyramid Principle:Logic:in Writing and Thinking

by Hidetoshi Shibata  Copy rights © H. Shibata all reserved, 1998


Filed under , having 0 comments  

MECE Principle

by Dustin

The MECE Principle

The MECE principle, pronounced MEESEE, mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive, is a grouping principle which says that data in a group should be divided into subgroups that comprehensively represent that group (no gaps) without overlapping. This is desirable for the purpose of analysis, because it avoids both the problem of double counting and the risk of overlooking information.
The MECE principle is useful in the business mapping process. If information can be arranged exhaustively and without double counting in each level of the hierarchy, the way of arrangement is ideal.
Examples of MECE categorization would include categorizing people by year of birth (assuming all years are known). A non-MECE example would be categorization by nationality, because nationalities are neither mutually exclusive (some people have dual nationality) nor collectively exhaustive (some people have none).

Via Wikipedia

Filed under , , having 0 comments  

Travelling in Toronto

September 13, 2008 by Dustin


Being in Toronto, I've got accustomed to living

I have only 15 days in Toronto.
Last week, I made up my mind to walk around Toronto as a backpacker.
I've visited some popular shops so far.
However, today, I was really a backpacker travelling in Toronto.
So I want to call today my first day of travel in Toronto.

First Day

I headed to Kensington Market after selling my bicycle for $65 this morning.
The place I first went to was 'European Sausage' shop.
It is an amazing shop which sells cheap sausages, hamburgers and souvlakis.
I bought a souvlaki for lunch and ate a delicious waffle at 'Goed Eten.'
and I enjoyed a cup of coffee at a beautiful coffee shop called 'Casa Acoreana Cafe,' reading 'Girl with a pearl earring' I borrowed at Toronto Public Library.
and then I visited at 'Moonbean Coffee,' and bought some coffee titled 'Bolivia Colonial Caranavi' for my friends in PMM.
Lastly, I read 'NOW' newspaper and a book outside, enjoying the rainy scenery.

I felt strange about Toronto when travelling.
shy and awkward.
I personally think re-explorings some places where I'm already been might make me feel shy.
I shouldn't have been at a loss.

I'll look through the eyes of a traveller for the remander of my time in Toronto.

From tomorrow, I will be a person I used to be when I traveled in Mexico.

Filed under , , having 0 comments