1. Introduction

In the military context, all strategies should display a triple aspect. First, the mitigation of self-generated friction. Secondly, the mitigation of friction generated by the enemy. Thirdly, the generation of friction in respect of the enemy plans and operations. In less martial contexts, such as scholarly research, strategies have a markedly different aspect. First, one's own interests, whether they are individual or the team's, should be promoted, and protected against inertia and obstructions. Secondly, care should be taken not to increase friction, whether created deliberately or absentmindedly, in our peers' undertakings in which one is not otherwise involved.

2. Projects and their inevitable frictions

It is suggested that there are at least eight kinds of hindrance (and conversely, possible hidden advantage), which play a major role in any scholarly endeavour.*
They are:

1. Work arrangements and tools that constitute IMPEDIMENTS TO WORK SPEED. This category deals with seven subsets of potential problems. These are: (i) slow information discovery, (ii) slow analysis of collected information, (iii) slow work access to the collected information, (iv) slow verification of data and resultant hypotheses, (v) slow correction of data and hypotheses, (vi) slow publication of results, and (vii) slow process of repurposing of collected data.
2. SHORTAGE OF SKILLS among the core research team, including the following specialist skills, (i) content skills, (ii) structure skills, (iii) format & appearance skills, (iv) programming and networking skills.
3. MANAGEMENT OF PROJECT FUNDS.
4. CAPRICES AND UNAVAILABILITY OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY. This category is also related to the second, insofar as specialist technology requires specialist skills.
5. COMPLICATIONS WITH SCHOLARLY COMMUNICATION among the core research team.
6. RESTRICTIONS ON FREEDOM OF ACTIVITY. Here the key problems is the extent to which a project needs to meet externally controlled/imposed deadlines and specifications.
7. COMPETING FOCI OF WORK. It is an onerous responsibility to balance the amount of work and attention given to: (i) Data/Measurements/Facts stage; (ii) Models/Hypotheses construction stage; (iii) Theory/Illumination/Narrative development and communication stage.
8. UNPREDICTABILITY OF WORK OUTCOMES

* This list is suggested by Dr Ciolek's 40 years (roughly) of relevant first-hand experience.

3. Six Pairs of Research Strategies and their Practical Consequences

In addition to the preceding list of areas of where a research project might meet with friction (or conversely, where a lubricant may help) one could also list the six following contrasting pairs of research strategies that a researcher might adopt. These are: (a) strategies of structure: "Fresco" vs. "Mosaic", (b) strategies of method: "Cathedral" vs. "Bazaar", (c) strategies of the location of the work-in-progress: "Centralised" vs. "Distributed", (d) strategies of the product's life cycle: "Frozen" vs. "Open-ended", (e) strategies of project funding: "Silk" vs. "Cotton", and finally (f) strategies of research personnel: "Guardsmen" vs. "Ronins".

None of the strategies are consequence-free. Each is capable not only of conferring some advantage to a given research project; it can do so only at the cost of introduction a degree of friction, or other complications, elsewhere in the project. Further, not all of the pairs of strategies are always articulated and consciously applied. In the heat of an engagement with a research problem, some of the decisions may be adopted on the spur of a moment, and others left unconsidered and unremarked for a long time. Regardless, such decisions always carry with them methodological karma.

4. Pragmatic Consequences of the Six Pairs of Research Strategies

4.1 The Strategies of the Structure: Fresco vs. Mosaic

If each of these two contrasting philosophies of work were illustrated by writings of an eminent scholar, it could be argued that a book by Fernand Braudel, "The Wheels of Commerce: Civilization & Capitalism 15th-18th Century" (2002) offers a well-shaped, seminal and coherent fresco of fascinating historical ideas. At the same time, one might argue that Barry Cunliffe's book "Europe between the Oceans - Themes and Variations: 9000 BC-AD 1000" (2008) has a strong resemblance to a beautifully formed, seminal and coherent mosaic of conclusions built from archaeological and historical data.

Naturally, each of these two alternative grand strategies of work has a distinct cost. For a rough comparison of these costs see the table below. For the sake of our argument's simplicity, in each instance where a particular research strategy increases friction in some aspect of the project, that strategy is given a score of -1. Conversely, where there seem to be an associated easing of friction, a score of +1 is awarded. In this methodological appendix no attempt has been made to weigh the relative importance of each of the eight aspects of a research endeavour. Definitely, more work on this area would be welcome.

Table 4.1
A comparison of the work advantages/disadvantages associated with two contrasting research strategies: Fresco vs. Mosaic.

	SPEED	SKILLS	ADMIN OVERHEADS	TECHNOLOGY	COMMS	FREEDOM	FOCUS	PREDICTABILITY	FINAL SCORE
FRESCO	Information Discovery - The variable's impact is not clear (=0) Slower Analysis (=-1) Slower Work Access (=-1) Verification (=-1) Slower Correction (=-1) Slower Publication (=-1) Slower Repurposing of Data (=-1)	High Content Skills (=-1) High Structure Skills (=-1) High Format & Appearance Skills (=-1) High IT Skills (=-1)	Higher Need for substantial Funding (=-1)	Higher Need for IT Tools (=-1)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0) Possible extra High focus on the Narrative.	High control over the Final Outcomes & Deadlines (=+1)	-11
MOSAIC	Information Discovery - The variable's impact is not clear (=0) Faster Analysis (=+1) Faster Work Access (=+1) Faster Verification (=+1) Faster Correction (=+1) Faster Publication (=+1) Faster Repurposing of Data (=+1)	High Content Skills (=-1) Low Structure Skills (=+1) Low Format & Appearance Skills (=+1) IT Skills - The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	Higher Need for IT Tools (=-1)	Higher Need for written intracommunications (=-1)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0) Especially High focus on the Data.	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	+5

Conclusion: The MOSAIC approach confers more advantages to one's research operations.

4.2 The Strategies of the Method: Cathedral vs. Bazaar

Table 4.2
A comparison of the work advantages/disadvantages associated with two contrasting research strategies: Cathedral vs. Bazaar.

	SPEED	SKILLS	ADMIN OVERHEADS	TECHNOLOGY	COMMS	FREEDOM	FOCUS	PREDICTABILITY	FINAL SCORE
CATHEDRAL	Information Discovery - The variable's impact is not clear (=0) Analysis - The variable's impact is not clear (=0) Slower Work Access (=-1) Slower Verification (=-1) Slower Correction (=-1) Slower Publication (=-1) Repurposing of Data - The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	High control over the Final Outcomes & Deadlines (=+1)	-3
BAZAAR	Faster Information Discovery (=+1) Faster Analysis (=+1) Faster Work Access (=+1) Faster Verification (=+1) Faster Correction (=+1) Slower Publication (=-1) Repurposing of Data - The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	Lower Content Skills (=+1) High Structure Skills (=-1) High Format & Appearance Skills (=-1) High IT Skills (=-1)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	Higher Need for IT Tools (=-1)	Higher Need for written intracommunications (=-1)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	Low control over the Final Outcomes & Deadlines (=-1)	-1

Conclusion: The BAZAAR approach confers more advantages.

4.3 The Strategies of Location of the Work-in-Progress: Centralised vs. Distributed

Table 4.3
A comparison of the work advantages/disadvantages associated with two contrasting research strategies: Centralised vs. Distributed.

	SPEED	SKILLS	ADMIN OVERHEADS	TECHNOLOGY	COMMS	FREEDOM	FOCUS	PREDICTABILITY	FINAL SCORE
CENTRALISED	Information Discovery, Analysis, Work Access, Verification, Correction, Publication - The variable's impact is not clear (=0) Faster Repurposing of Data (=+1)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	Higher Need for substantial Funding (=-1)	Lower Need for IT Tools (=+1)	Lower Need for written intracommunications (=+1)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	High control over the Final Outcomes & Deadlines (=+1)	+3
DISTRIBUTED	Information Discovery, Analysis, Work Access, Verification, Correction, Publication - The variable's impact is not clear (=0) Slower Repurposing of Data (=-1)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	Lower Need for substantial Funding (=+1)	Higher Need for IT Tools (=-1)	Higher Need for written intracommunications (=-1)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	Low control over the Final Outcomes & Deadlines (=-1)	-3

Conclusion: The CENTRALISED approach confers more advantages.

4.4 The Strategies of the Product's Life Cycle: Frozen vs. Open-ended

Table 4.4
A comparison of the work advantages/disadvantages associated with two contrasting research strategies: Frozen vs. Open-ended.

	SPEED	SKILLS	ADMIN OVERHEADS	TECHNOLOGY	COMMS	FREEDOM	FOCUS	PREDICTABILITY	FINAL SCORE
FROZEN	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	High control over the Final Outcomes & Deadlines (=+1)	+1
OPEN-ENDED	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	Higher Need for IT Tools (=-1)	Higher Need for written intracommunications (=-1)	Lower Need to meet external deadlines and specifications (=+1)	High focus on Data Low focus on Hypotheses Low focus on the Narrative. The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	Low control over the Final Outcomes & Deadlines (=-1)	-2

Conclusion: The FROZEN approach confers more advantages.

4.5 The Strategies of the Project's Funding: Silk vs. Cotton

Table 4.5
A comparison of the work advantages/disadvantages associated with two contrasting research strategies: Silk vs. Cotton.

	SPEED	SKILLS	ADMIN OVERHEADS	TECHNOLOGY	COMMS	FREEDOM	FOCUS	PREDICTABILITY	FINAL SCORE
SILK	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	Higher Need for substantial Overheads (=-1)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	Higher Need to meet external deadlines and specifications (=-1)	High focus on Data Low focus on Hypotheses High focus on the Narrative. The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	High control over the Final Outcomes & Deadlines (=+1)	-1
COTTON	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	Lower Need for substantial Overheads (=+1)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	Higher Need for written intracommunications (=-1)	Lower Need to meet external deadlines and specifications (=+1)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	+2

Conclusion: The COTTON approach confers more advantages.

4.6 The Strategies of the Research Personnel: Guardsmen vs. Ronins

Table 4.6
A comparison of the work advantages/disadvantages associated with two contrasting research strategies: Guardsmen vs. Ronins.

	SPEED	SKILLS	ADMIN OVERHEADS	TECHNOLOGY	COMMS	FREEDOM	FOCUS	PREDICTABILITY	FINAL SCORE
GUARDSMEN	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	Higher Need for substantial Funding (=-1)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	High control over the Final Outcomes & Deadlines (=+1)	0
RONINS	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	Lower Need for substantial Funding (=+1)	Higher Need for IT Tools (=-1)	Higher Need for written intracommunications (=-1)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	The variable's impact is not clear (=0)	Low control over the Final Outcomes & Deadlines (=-1)	-3

Conclusion: The GUARDSMEN approach confers more advantages.

5. Findings

The "Dream Project" contrasts sharply with the "friction/lubricant" rating for the "Nightmare Project" combination of research strategies. In that combination, every opportunity to gain positive points is studiously avoided, and every opportunity to make one's work cumbersome and awkward is indulged in. Its blood-curdling score of minus 23 points involves the following ingredients: FRESCO -11; CATHEDRAL -3; DISTRIBUTED -3; OPEN-ENDED -2; SILK -1; RONINS -3.

The overall spread, or the numeric distance between these two extremes is 34 absolute points, with the median value being minus 7. In other words, researchers should try to use a combination of research strategies that results in a positive total friction/lubricant score, or at least a score than is no smaller than minus seven.

Further, if we look at the overall rating of the methodologies favoured by the MBM Project (namely, MOSAIC +5; BAZAAR -1; DISTRIBUTED -3; OPEN-ENDED -2; COTTON +2; RONINS -3), with the total "friction/lubricant" rating of minus 2, we can conclude that in the overall scheme of things the MBM project rolls along fairly smoothly.

http://www.ciolek.com/PAPERS/mbm-mapping-buddhist-world.html

Copyright (c) 2012 by T. Matthew Ciolek. All rights reserved.