As a young database professional in the mid-1970s I grew up on metadata – data that describes and defines other data. In fact, I wrote one of the first books explaining it from a data-as-corporate-resource point of view in 1980.[1]
Who knew that in the 21st century there would ever be such a thing as big data, more dependent on metadata (if that’s possible) than even ‘regular’ (transaction) data?! Or that the metadata of phone conversations would become a central artifact in the struggle over civil liberties?!
Back then it never much occurred to me that there could be other kinds of “meta”. Well, except maybe metaphysics. But you don’t want to go there. That’s some realm beyond physics where physics isn’t physics any more.[2]
Anyway, I was wrong about there not being other important kinds of “meta”.
Other Meta’s
In the 1990s I learned there was such a thing as meta-rules – rules that govern rules. That led to RuleSpeak® – rules for expressing rules in structured natural language.[3] It also more recently ledto new thinking about the engineering of governance – rules guiding the creation, approval and dissemination of business policies in an organization. (Think rulebook management as governance infrastructure.)
I’m also pretty sure there could be metaprocesses – processes that orchestrate or transform other processes. It seems to me that one goal of intelligent agents is exactly that. What else? I’m no expert on that.
What other meaningful kinds of “meta” are there? It’s fun to play with the question words where, who, and when, but I don’t think there are any real “meta’s” to those. I could be be wrong. Thoughts?
I do have one strict rule for judging when you have something truly “meta”. Here’s my rule:
Some meaningful verb(s), not a preposition, must be used in defining a “meta” thing.
Examples we’ve already discussed:
Metadata – data that describes anddefines data. (You should not say just “data about data”.)
Meta-rule – rule that governs rules. (You should not say just “rules about rules”.)
Metaprocess – process that orchestrates or transforms other processes. (You should not say just “processes about processes”.)
Where else could you look for “meta’s”? Merriam-Webster UnabridgedDictionary (MWUD) defines the kind of “meta” we’re discussing here as follows[4]:
3b: of a higher logical type – in nouns formed from names of disciplines and designating new but related disciplines such as can deal critically with the nature, structure, or behavior of the original ones
MWUD gives these examples (the verbs are mine):
metalanguage – language for discussing languages.
metatheory– theory for structuring theories.
metasystem – system for organizing systems.
In science & research literature these days you commonly read about meta-analysis. An article in The Economist recently defined meta-analysis as “a technique which uses entire studies as single data points in an overarching statistical analysis”. In other words, an analysis that analyzes other analyses.
I wonder if there is such a thing as meta-architecture – architecture for designing architectures? That’s certainly an interesting question, and I’m not certain I know the answer. Thoughts?
I do know there’s meta-vocabulary – vocabulary that enables communication about vocabularies. That’s a central feature of the OMG standard SBVR (Semantics of Business Vocabulary and Business Rules).[5] I can tell you with great certainty that a meta-vocabulary is not the same thing as metadata – not by a long shot! I can also tell you that in a knowledge economy, meta-vocabulary will ultimately prove more important than metadata.
The Ultimate Metas
I believe there’s also such a thing as meta-knowhow – knowhow that enables the organizing of other knowhow. Unfortunately, as few business practitioners today know how important meta-knowhow is as knew how important metadata was in the mid-1970s.
That will change. And it won’t take long.
Meta-knowhow for organizing core operational business knowhow[6] is essential not only to play in the knowledge economy, but simply to contain the costs of operating as we do today. Best practices already exist for the area. Companies are paying a huge (and unsustainable) price for not engaging with them. I will have much more to say about meta-knowhow in the near future.
The most interesting and powerful “meta” of all, however, has to be meta-idea – an idea that enables the birthing (ideation[7]) of (other) ideas. These are the things that bootstrap whole cultures to a new level of intellectual empowerment. Examples: (the ideas of) libraries, encyclopedias and universal education.
In The Second Machine Age[8] the authors argue convincingly that with the internet’s true coming of age we’re living the next big meta-idea right now. It’s hard to argue the point. You (the reader) are experiencing it at this very moment. After all, how likely is it that we would be conceptualizing “meta” together here if it weren’t for the internet?!
P.S. The concept “meta” is itself actually a meta-idea. Now there’s a good brain teaser if you want to play with it!
www.BRSolutions.com
[1]Data Dictionaries and Data Administration: Concepts and Practices for Data Resources Management, by Ronald G. Ross, AMACOM (American Management Association), New York, 1981, 454pp. The definition of metadata in the preceding sentence is straight from the glossary, pp. 432.
[2] I mean the Merriam-Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary definition 1b(1): something that deals with what is beyond the physical or the experiential.
[4] MWUD’s meaning for metaphysics is different: 3a: beyond : transcending. It lists examples as metapsychosis, metageometry, metabiological, and metempirics(meta-empirics). Let’s not go there(!). The “meta” I mean (definition 3b) is far more specific and useful, even if highly abstract.
[7] MWUD definition: the process of entertaining and relating ideas.
[8]The Second Machine Age: Work, Progress and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant Technologies, by Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee, W.W. Norton & Company, New York, 2014, pp. 306.
Ron Ross, Principal and Co-Founder of Business Rules Solutions, LLC, is internationally acknowledged as the “father of business rules.” Recognizing early on the importance of independently managed business rules for business operations and architecture, he has pioneered innovative techniques and standards since the mid-1980s. He wrote the industry’s first book on business rules in 1994.
How about meta apps. In mobile’s context driven user experience, applications have states – Active (running), Pause (inactive), Resume (re-activate), Close (suspend). So, one application leads to series of other applications
which justifies multi-tasking in mobile environment.
Regarding “meta-architecture” — take a look at “Design Rules: The Power of Modularity” by Carliss Y. Baldwin & Kim B. Clark (2000, MIT Press, ISBN 0-262-02466-7). They are professors at Harvard Business School.
Here’s a quote from the dust jacket:
“Using the computer industry as an example, Carliss Y. Brown and Kim B. Clark develop a powerful theory of design and industrial evolution.”
Here’s some of what Wikipedia says about “metacognition”:
“This higher-level cognition was given the label metacognition by American developmental psychologist John Flavell (1976). The term … literally means cognition about cognition, or more informally, thinking about thinking. Flavell defined metacognition as knowledge about cognition and control of cognition.”
Using my ‘verb-not-proposition rule’ you get “cognition that knows about, and controls, cognition”. In other words, it’s about (also from Wikipedia) “when and how to use particular strategies for learning or for problem solving.”.
Interesting idea, but I would keep it simple for people. A process contains process data, meaning the content itself is really data or data that is used over and over to describe what to do. If you want to have a summary explaining what the process is all about, you could call it meta data for processes. However, I think it would be simpler using plain English to say what it is, such as “process description”. A process could have sub-processes, such as in a parent/children relationship, but that’s not meta data. It’s just a high level process pointing to lower level processes that help get the work done for the overall parent’s needs. My vote is no for “meta process”.
In that sense, maybe a process for creating processes, like a “Manage Processes” process, could be a metaprocess. This process, in fact, materializes a method to apply a PDCA to processes.
I’m not really sure why there would be a question “Is there a meta process”. I would say that for any X there exists a meta X. If we look at a general definitions (basically a meta being some set of information that is used to transform/modify a subset or derived set), and use “create” as a special case of modify, we would see that for any X that exists there must be a meta set that defines the creation of that object. And since our definitions describe X impacting X we have a recursive type situation that leads us (me at least) to the construct of a “Meta-Tree”. At the top of the x=>process tree for all processes (or X’s) the final “meta” is the “rules” that created the universe. (I know I’m getting pretty abstract). I would propose the axiom “that for any X there exists a meta X”. The rest is just domain semantics.
The semantics I proposed could never take you back to the “final ‘meta’ … the ‘rules’ that created the universe.” That would be “kind of thing that creates other kinds of thing”. I wouldn’t want to say whether that kind of thing is rules, process … or something else.
“We actively use the BRS business-side techniques and train our business analysts in the approach. The techniques bring clarity between our BAs & customers, plus more robust requirements for our development teams. We’ve seen tremendous value.”
Jeanine Bradley – Railinc
“Sessions flow together well and build upon the concepts for the series which makes the learning easy and better retention.
The instructor is knowledgeable and very attentive to the audience given the range of attendees skill and knowledge of the subject at hand. I enjoy her training sessions.”
Deborah – American Family Insurance
“Your work has been one of the foundations of my success in our shared passion for data integration. It has had a huge impact on innumerable people!”
“A great class that explains the importance of business rules in today’s work place.”
Christopher – McKesson
“I found the course interesting and will be helpful.
I like the pragmatic reality you discuss, while a rule tool would be great, recognizing many people will use Word/Excel to capture them helps. We can’t jump from crazy to perfect in one leap!
Use of the polls is also great. Helps see how everyone else is doing (we are not alone), and helps us think about our current state.”
Trevor – Investors Group
“You did a wonderful job!! The material was organized and valuable.”
Janell – Texas State University
“Instructors were very knowledgeable and could clearly explain concepts and convey importance of strategy and architecture.
It was a more comprehensive, holistic approach to the subject than other training. Emphasis on understanding the business prior to technology considerations was reassuring to business stakeholders.”
Sushmita Dutt
| #
How about meta apps. In mobile’s context driven user experience, applications have states – Active (running), Pause (inactive), Resume (re-activate), Close (suspend). So, one application leads to series of other applications
which justifies multi-tasking in mobile environment.
Mark H Linehan
| #
Regarding “meta-architecture” — take a look at “Design Rules: The Power of Modularity” by Carliss Y. Baldwin & Kim B. Clark (2000, MIT Press, ISBN 0-262-02466-7). They are professors at Harvard Business School.
Here’s a quote from the dust jacket:
“Using the computer industry as an example, Carliss Y. Brown and Kim B. Clark develop a powerful theory of design and industrial evolution.”
Julian Sammy
| #
What about metacognition? (google define:metacognition)
metacognition: awareness and understanding of one’s own thought processes
or
metacognition: thinking that explores thinking.
Ronald G. Ross
| #
Here’s some of what Wikipedia says about “metacognition”:
“This higher-level cognition was given the label metacognition by American developmental psychologist John Flavell (1976). The term … literally means cognition about cognition, or more informally, thinking about thinking. Flavell defined metacognition as knowledge about cognition and control of cognition.”
Using my ‘verb-not-proposition rule’ you get “cognition that knows about, and controls, cognition”. In other words, it’s about (also from Wikipedia) “when and how to use particular strategies for learning or for problem solving.”.
Yeah, that’s a good one!
Wout de Jong
| #
Metamodel comes to mind, or the metametamodel. I get confused by these recursive abstractions…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metamodeling
Paul Dandurand
| #
Interesting idea, but I would keep it simple for people. A process contains process data, meaning the content itself is really data or data that is used over and over to describe what to do. If you want to have a summary explaining what the process is all about, you could call it meta data for processes. However, I think it would be simpler using plain English to say what it is, such as “process description”. A process could have sub-processes, such as in a parent/children relationship, but that’s not meta data. It’s just a high level process pointing to lower level processes that help get the work done for the overall parent’s needs. My vote is no for “meta process”.
Metadata vs. Meta-AnythingElse — Ron Ross on Business Rules
| #
[…] [1] This series of point/counterpoint replies is a follow-up to my post “Meta Here. Meta There. Meta Everywhere?” (March 31, 2014), which generated a surprising amount of great discussion. (Thanks all!) Refer to: http://www.brsolutions.com/2014/03/31/meta-here-meta-there-meta-everywhere/ […]
MetaProcess vs. Enabling Process — Ron Ross on Business Rules
| #
[…] [1] This series of point/counterpoint replies is a follow-up to my post “Meta Here. Meta There. Meta Everywhere?” (March 31, 2014), which generated a surprising amount of great discussion. (Thanks all!) Refer to: http://www.brsolutions.com/2014/03/31/meta-here-meta-there-meta-everywhere/ […]
MetaProcess vs. Something More than a Process — Ron Ross on Business Rules
| #
[…] [1] This series of point/counterpoint replies is a follow-up to my post “Meta Here. Meta There. Meta Everywhere?” (March 31, 2014), which generated a surprising amount of great discussion. (Thanks all!) Refer to: http://www.brsolutions.com/2014/03/31/meta-here-meta-there-meta-everywhere/ […]
MetaProcess vs. Generalization of Processes — Ron Ross on Business Rules
| #
[…] [1] This series of point/counterpoint replies is a follow-up to my post “Meta Here. Meta There. Meta Everywhere?” (March 31, 2014), which generated a surprising amount of great discussion. (Thanks all!) Refer to: http://www.brsolutions.com/2014/03/31/meta-here-meta-there-meta-everywhere/ […]
MetaProcess vs. Universal Process Pattern (UPP) — Ron Ross on Business Rules
| #
[…] [1] This series of point/counterpoint replies is a follow-up to my post “Meta Here. Meta There. Meta Everywhere?” (March 31, 2014), which generated a surprising amount of great discussion. (Thanks all!) Refer to: http://www.brsolutions.com/2014/03/31/meta-here-meta-there-meta-everywhere/ […]
Meta-Footnote? — Ron Ross on Business Rules
| #
[…] [1] This series of point/counterpoint replies is a follow-up to my post “Meta Here. Meta There. Meta Everywhere?” (March 31, 2014), which generated a surprising amount of great discussion. (Thanks all!) Refer to: http://www.brsolutions.com/2014/03/31/meta-here-meta-there-meta-everywhere/ […]
Are PDCA & DAMIC MetaProcesses? — Ron Ross on Business Rules
| #
[…] [1] This series of point/counterpoint replies is a follow-up to my post “Meta Here. Meta There. Meta Everywhere?” (March 31, 2014), which generated a surprising amount of great discussion. (Thanks all!) Refer to: http://www.brsolutions.com/2014/03/31/meta-here-meta-there-meta-everywhere/ […]
Process Model or Process Instance … Which Do You Mean in ‘Metaprocess’? — Ron Ross on Business Rules
| #
[…] [1] This series of point/counterpoint replies is a follow-up to my post “Meta Here. Meta There. Meta Everywhere?” (March 31, 2014), which generated a surprising amount of great discussion. (Thanks all!) Refer to: http://www.brsolutions.com/2014/03/31/meta-here-meta-there-meta-everywhere/ […]
Testing for “Meta” Somethings – An Example — Ron Ross on Business Rules
| #
[…] [1] This series of point/counterpoint replies is a follow-up to my post “Meta Here. Meta There. Meta Everywhere?” (March 31, 2014), which generated a surprising amount of great discussion. (Thanks all!) Refer to: http://www.brsolutions.com/2014/03/31/meta-here-meta-there-meta-everywhere/ […]
What about Meta-Meta-Somethings? — Ron Ross on Business Rules
| #
[…] [1] This series of point/counterpoint replies is a follow-up to my post “Meta Here. Meta There. Meta Everywhere?” (March 31, 2014), which generated a surprising amount of great discussion. (Thanks all!) Refer to: http://www.brsolutions.com/2014/03/31/meta-here-meta-there-meta-everywhere/ […]
Meta-System? — Ron Ross on Business Rules
| #
[…] [1] This series of point/counterpoint replies is a follow-up to my post “Meta Here. Meta There. Meta Everywhere?” (March 31, 2014), which generated a surprising amount of great discussion. (Thanks all!) Refer to: http://www.brsolutions.com/2014/03/31/meta-here-meta-there-meta-everywhere/ […]
Is There Such a Thing as Meta-Architecture? — Ron Ross on Business Rules
| #
[…] [1] This series of point/counterpoint replies is a follow-up to my post “Meta Here. Meta There. Meta Everywhere?” (March 31, 2014), which generated a surprising amount of great discussion. (Thanks all!) Refer to: http://www.brsolutions.com/2014/03/31/meta-here-meta-there-meta-everywhere/ […]
Meta-Cognition — Ron Ross on Business Rules
| #
[…] [1] This series of point/counterpoint replies is a follow-up to my post “Meta Here. Meta There. Meta Everywhere?” (March 31, 2014), which generated a surprising amount of great discussion. (Thanks all!) Refer to: http://www.brsolutions.com/2014/03/31/meta-here-meta-there-meta-everywhere/ […]
Metaprocess vs. Governance Process — Ron Ross on Business Rules
| #
[…] [1] This series of point/counterpoint replies is a follow-up to my post “Meta Here. Meta There. Meta Everywhere?” (March 31, 2014), which generated a surprising amount of great discussion. (Thanks all!) Refer to: http://www.brsolutions.com/2014/03/31/meta-here-meta-there-meta-everywhere/ […]
Luiz Carvalho
| #
In that sense, maybe a process for creating processes, like a “Manage Processes” process, could be a metaprocess. This process, in fact, materializes a method to apply a PDCA to processes.
Ronald G. Ross
| #
Yes, a process to manage (other) processes is a meta-process.
Randy Buchholz
| #
I’m not really sure why there would be a question “Is there a meta process”. I would say that for any X there exists a meta X. If we look at a general definitions (basically a meta being some set of information that is used to transform/modify a subset or derived set), and use “create” as a special case of modify, we would see that for any X that exists there must be a meta set that defines the creation of that object. And since our definitions describe X impacting X we have a recursive type situation that leads us (me at least) to the construct of a “Meta-Tree”. At the top of the x=>process tree for all processes (or X’s) the final “meta” is the “rules” that created the universe. (I know I’m getting pretty abstract). I would propose the axiom “that for any X there exists a meta X”. The rest is just domain semantics.
Ronald G. Ross
| #
The semantics I proposed could never take you back to the “final ‘meta’ … the ‘rules’ that created the universe.” That would be “kind of thing that creates other kinds of thing”. I wouldn’t want to say whether that kind of thing is rules, process … or something else.
… or perhaps, Something Else.
The Governance Process Is What It Is – And That’s Way More Than Meta! — Ron Ross on Business Rules
| #
[…] [1] See http://www.brsolutions.com/2014/03/31/meta-here-meta-there-meta-everywhere/ […]