A declared voice,
not an invented person.
A representation with a remit, sources and a mandate. It can be challenged and corrected; it is not the clone of a real person.
IN THE PROJECT: SELFTWIN
We think together, therefore we are.People first.
People first.
AI, in service.
Adding up answers is not enough to build a position. COGI offers a way for different perspectives to talk to each other, keeping track of reasons, limits and responsibilities.
The discussion starts
with those who can be there.
Those who know the process and those who live with the consequences of the choice must have a place in the discussion. Real people are involved before any representations of absent perspectives are built.
01
Presence.
The relevant people are involved. Their contribution does not become a detail in a simulation.
02
Representation.
Absent perspectives can be added with sources, a mandate and explicit limits.
03
Responsibility.
Whoever is entitled to decide keeps the choice. A piece of processing is not an authorisation.
Change is built
with those who live it.
VALUE+ is the project’s declared methodological root: dialogue between people precedes and guides the use of technology. The applied programme must be built on a well-defined process.
01
Frame a useful question.
What needs to be decided? What is out of scope? Which constraints cannot be ignored?
02
Bring out the perspectives.
Those who know the work, those who live with its effects, those left outside the room. Evidence and assumptions remain distinguishable.
03
Compare without flattening.
Dissent is not a fault to hide. It can reveal a risk, a constraint or a better alternative.
04
Report and verify.
The options are documented and we define how to assess the process. The outcome of not going ahead must also remain possible.
The project’s vocabulary,
with no hidden entry requirements.
Specialist terms are there to distinguish functions, not to make you learn a language before you understand the offer.
A declared voice,
A position
that keeps its reasons.
The organisational layer composes the voices and keeps a memory of the positions. It does not hand ownership of the decision to the system.
IN THE PROJECT: THÝRA
Measuring the distance
does not mean eliminating dissent.
A divergence indicator describes one aspect of the discussion. A lower value does not, on its own, prove that the choice is better.
IN THE PROJECT: δ INDEX
An architecture
with distinct layers.
People, representations, models and actions are not interchangeable. The layers describe how these responsibilities are kept separate.
IN THE PROJECT: WAFER
Editorial summary of the approach published by the project.
No consensus for show.
No implicit delegation.
Does COGI decide on the organisation’s behalf?
No. The proposal described on this site concerns preparing and documenting the discussion. The choice and any subsequent actions remain with the authorised decision-makers.
Is a representation the same as a consultation?
No. A represented perspective cannot be presented as gathered testimony or as the consent of people who were not involved. Sources, mandate and limits must be visible.
Is agreement always the desired outcome?
No. Reasoned dissent can point to a real problem. The quality of the process is assessed against agreed criteria, not just the convergence of positions.
Does the method guarantee an operational result?
No. The pilot is there to test a hypothesis of usefulness. The documented report and the effect on the process are different results, to be measured with separate timescales and criteria.
“We think together, therefore we are.”
Not a promise to automate people. An invitation to make dialogue part of how an organisation chooses.
It starts with a real questionWhich decision
Which decision
do you want to tackle?
Tell us about the process, not the solution. The first conversation is about understanding whether, and where, COGI can be useful.
Start a conversation