I haven’t developed the Way of Twitter, to add much to a conversation, so I am late to and from the narrative.
The link Critt was asking for is the one in this Tweet feed, in the narrative I and Michael Gerald Moore had: Here are the two systems side by side, as drawn out in the HBS article:The OODA loop follows the Implicit Strategy Model of the Past Decade, while the Double Freytag Triangle follows the Sustainable Competitive Advantage.
While the OODA loop sustains itself by constant cycling, and positions it self through its Orientation, much like Sustainable Competitive Advantage, the position isn’t unique, because it is always receiving feed-ahead and feed-back, and the OODA loop doesn’t really sustain itself, because there is always another Act.
On the other hand the Double Freytag Triangle does sustain a Unique competitive position, because it first forms a “Cheap Trick” that is never the position at the peak of the second triangle. After the second Triangle the Double Freytag Triangle dies, and is reborn depending on if the position was sustainable or not.
What happens in an OODA loop, constructiveness and destructiveness occupy the same time/space. The constructive and destructive forces acts, as flux does inside an electric motor. In side an electric motor, the constructive and destructive forces hold each other to an optimum speed, or more precisely, tempo. The outcome of the Action of two forces in flux is the harmonization or the re-harmonization of the environment Observed.
In the Double Freytag Triangle, the constructive and destructive force are only used to sustain the structure of the triangle.
The Tempo in a Double Freytag Triangle is in the doing, unlike a OODA loop where the Tempo is in the being.