Many of you have commented to me about the Triad – version 1.0 – mostly positive feedback.
Some have sought a more detailed explanation about the workings of the model – I am going to try and do that, even though from where I look at it, the figure is self-explanatory.
One friend wrote back suggesting a re-look at the name, given the military associations with it. I might consider a name change but have so far been driven by this definition of the term. But, that’s for later – task at hand is to get the model right first.
In version 1.0 , I wasn’t particularly satisfied with the inner hexagon. It seemed to me that in isolation, the triangles representing ‘Ingredients’ and ‘Action Points’ worked fine, but when seen together, the sequence wasn’t correct. It was important that the sequence, as I have experienced in real-world scenarios, is not altered.
Another look and the answers seemed obvious. Here is version 1.1:
Trying a more detailed, yet simplified, explanation:
The flow seems more organised to me now. Also each adjacent triangle should have a relationship with each-other was a thought. Please let me know what you think of the reworked model. Your inputs would allow me to clean this up further, if needed.
Disclaimer: Views of authors are personal and do not represent the views of Blogworks, or any of its clients.