Yes, this is the kind of application you want to buy an iPad for. And yes, this is the way I want to work with it – KISS (Keep it Stupid Simple) – not struggling with the tool but just do what has to be done in a pleasant way.

After this first wow-experience it’s time to have a closer look at the features. Reading it I think it is good to divide between more or less ‘only iPad users’ and professionals who also use iMindMap and other mind mapping software on PC/Mac.

Creating and editing an iMindMap

As I said, making a mind map on the iPad is a great pleasure. It has an attractive look & feel and on my way to a meeting last Saturday I quickly and intuitive produced the branches and sub branches after first finding the right central image out of three categories (‘Objects’. ‘Abstract’ and ‘General’) – more than 40 images in total. Every branch comes up with a new color and will keep that for its sub branches (you can give them another color afterwards).

The organic form is standard and cannot be changed. Unless you are in speed mode you can draw in any direction. Want to add an image to a branch? Ten groups with 2 – 12 images each are available – this should be enough for most mind maps.

If you want to add a so called ‘box branch’ (a branch that has a text box in it) than you have to select this before. Drawing a branch brings up the keyboard to enter text. While with normal branches you push ‘Done’ after finishing the text with a ‘box branch’ this button is not available …

The Speed Mind Map Mode is a fast way of creating an iMindMap – it means less drawing. In this mode there are two extra buttons available on your screen (bottom left and right) to add ‘child’s’ or ‘siblings’ on the next place (clockwise) in your mind map. It’s possible to change the places of the branches afterwards.

Editing a branch

To edit a branch just select it and hit the ‘pencil button’ on the top. An edit box appears and you are able to edit text, add an icon, a branch link (to be opened in iPad’s Safari) and/or a branch note. The last possibility in the edit box is the delete button, but be careful: the application doesn’t have an undo button …

Holding your finger on the body of a branch brings up a little menu with the functions cut/copy/paste/edit. Cut/copy and paste to another branch works fine but it’s not possible to paste to the central theme.

After finishing the mind map it will appear as a thumbnail in the Map Browsing Screen, sorted alphabetically. Tapping the thumbnail will show a preview and possibilities as export, delete and presentation.

Exporting an iMindMap

Exporting a mind map means generating an email with attachments. Exporting an image will generate a PNG image of the map and also a zipped file that again contains the PNG image and an .imm version of the mind map. The .imm makes it possible to work further on your map with the iMindMap application on your computer. The export to PDF also generates a PNG image and a zipped file with a PDF and an .imm version of your mind map.

The quality of the PDF could be better – using Adobe Acrobat I see some thin lines that don’t belong there. Also Adobe gave me the message that it couldn’t extract an embedded font. Drawing a mind map in the train and send it directly to

colleagues or customers is a comfortable function – but it also means that you need an Internet connection and a mail service on your iPad.

Importing an iMindMap from your PC doesn’t work. The application does not have this functionality. I tried it by selecting an iMindMap in my DropBox but it was not recognized by iMindMap Mobile HD. I hope this will be possible in the next version.

Presentation Mode

I was very interested in the presentation mode, but I must say that I’m a bit disappointed. Yes, you can make that mind map to present and iMindMap Mobile HD has a presentation mode. But to start with you have to draw the branches in the appropriate sequence because it is not possible to change that afterwards. Exporting to the PC/Mac version would make it possible to change this sequence but then you can’t bring it back to the iPad … Also existing presentation maps cannot be used because of the missing import function.

Something else is that a monitor or beamer is necessary (and not always available) because the presentation cannot be shown on the iPad itself – something I could use … On the moment the mind map branches are in the right sequence and there is a monitor or beamer available the presentation mode is very impressive for your audience.

Working together on iMindMap for iPad

For an individual use iMindMap Mobile HD is great. Depending on the situation I was using the normal mode or the speed mode to generate some mind maps that impressed also the people that I showed the way to do it and the results.

Working with others on a mind map is difficult because this ‘mind map in progress’ cannot be shown on a monitor or beamer – this function is only available in presentation mode. I tried to use the ‘Camera Kit’ for the iPad (because this has an USB-adaptor) to connect the iPad using the USB-connection of my extended monitor but the monitor was not recognized

Video

Please see the official video 4 miniute from ThinkBuzan below.

Conclusion

iMindMap Mobile HD for the iPad is an easy and accessible application, the development department of ThinkBuzan has done a great job. It’s a pleasure to work with and it’s also a pleasure to look at. There are however a few improvement points for the actual version and some extra for the next version of iMindMap Mobile HD for the ‘professionals’.

For me the most important improvements would be

• the connection to a monitor/beamer with the possibilty to make the drawing process also visible for others,
• a presentation mode on the iPad itself with the possibility to easily re-sequence the branches and
• importing existing iMindMaps from my PC, even if I eventually would lose some elements.

Still, I love it!
Hans Terhurne is a facilitator, trainer and efficiency coach using the ingredients ‘dialogue’, ‘visual mapping’ and ‘creative problem solving techniques’ to generate involvement and commitment for the next step in business management items. The name of his organization is CreaMatics – active in a systematic way and finding new solutions for today’s challenges.

Mind mapping as a single radiant process has failed miserably to become a mainstream method globally. 40 years after the formalization by Mr Tony Buzan, and here we are still trying to justify its use and infusion into the mainstream.

Many of our colleagues are even confused as to the designations and distinct differences between Mind-Visual and Knowledge mapping.

Visual Mapping on the other hand is more descriptive of the multiple formats available for graphical expressiveness of information.

Knowledge mapping/management seems to be the future key with connectivity to back end data bases; namely relational databases. Some are using tools such as Mind mapping and flow charts as rather good front end applications in the vein of dash boards and master map configurations.

I would suggest that we are more effectively positioned as Information Managers and facilitators, who understand the value of Whole Brain information management.

The Mind mapping arena, whilst an excellent format for initial exposure to more effective Information management processing has failed to capture the generations proceeding the initial formalization of hand drawn Buzan Mapping 40 years ago.

It is rather amazing yet embarrassing to view the landscape and see some claiming Mind mapping to be the great panacea for the ills of current information management practices.

I firmly believe we should debate an approach for this portion of this century; as we shall be passing on this initiative to future generations for further development and improvement.

The potential strategy may be one of a focus on information management rather than a focus on the tools. The methods are important; yet the application of the mindset is IMO most important. Very few of our colleagues actually speak of the association with a mindset.

I firmly believe the Body of Knowledge proposal made some years ago by Arjen Ter Hoeve and Wallace Tait was and remains to be an initiative that would solidify, verify and validate our purpose, Mission and Business model. At this time Pascal Venier and Wallace Tait are pro-actively seeking to prove the viability of such a venture; using current academic and business management system standards as benchmarks for the establishment of a BOK.

Wallace Tait: Visualmapper

Fundamental changes are occurring in the ways in which we understand and solve problems. They influence most aspects of our personal and business life. Former tried and tested formulae of the past no longer fit to the future needs of problem solving and planning.
Albert Einstein: “The significant problems we have cannot be solved at the same level of thinking with which we created them”.

What is Scenario Mapping?

Scenario mapping is a robust strategic method which can be used in diverse ways. Scenario Mapping is a method where (after finding out what the core questions of issues are, together with the people and groups involved) in a mini workshop is explored what the driving forces and trends are. This is done with the help of mind mapping (by hand and/or with the help of software).

The grouped results are the basis for a second follow-up mini workshop where 2 – 4 less or more possible future scenarios are developed in the form of mind maps and discussed. Thus the participants (at all levels of authority) know what’s going on now and in probable future scenarios within their organization …

The result of this form of Mapping is a set of ‘Scenario Maps’ which graphically express an alternative look at possible and/or impossible (?) futures – they are however not predictions! With the assistance of these scenarios an organization can react faster to current and probable changing business conditions and opportunities.

Participants are often surprised by the speed and impact of Scenario Mapping sessions!

What is the purpose of Scenario Mapping?

Scenario Mapping helps to improve the performance of organizations by:

• Stimulating creativity focusing on the future
• Discover new possible opportunities for improvement
• Find new perspectives

… And can be done when

• We lose our ambition and sense of urgency
• We perceive issues different than the most important stakeholders
• Current situations are uncertain
• We are more reactive rather than proactive
• We’re not so good at lateral thinking – and need to be graphically inspired
• We want to be more sure about the planned and probable futures
• Plans are written by a small people in a small room and don’t seem to correlate with current realities of the majority
• We would like to involve more people in strategic themes
• We seem to go off at a tangent – there is no common sense for what we see.

Who should be involved with Scenario Mapping?

It is important that everybody is invited who has a picture of the possible future. Just invite everybody whose interest can be stimulated to invest in the future of the organization. Apart from senior management; the inclusion of passionate employees, volunteers, customers, competitors (!), local authorities, suppliers and partners are essential.

Hans Terhurne is a facilitator, trainer and efficiency coach using the ingredients ‘dialogue’, ‘visual mapping’ and ‘creative problem solving techniques’ to generate involvement and commitment for the next step in business management items. The name of his organization is CreaMatics – active in a systematic way and finding new solutions for today’s challenges.

1. Correspondence
2. Polarity
3. Cause and Effect

Linear thinking is integral with non linear thinking and processing (correspondence).

The human makes decisions based on thoughts that produce data, which is made up of numbers, words and images. This data, when aggregated, becomes information, which when contextualized becomes relevant information. Information feeds the concept of knowledge, and depending on the specific management and application of knowledge, it makes us more valuable, which may be results oriented and in turn may be a measure of success.

It has been said (flippantly IMO) we humans have a left and right brain (but of course there’s more); in fact we have a single unit brain that has a left and right hemisphere connected with some heavy duty tissue (wiring). Science has proven that when we use our brains to make a logical decision, we visualize the outcome first.
Equally it has been proven when we visualize a scenario; we are calculating a degree of logic associated with the imagined scenario.

Looking at a thermometer we see the measurement of temperature (polarity). We see a series of horizontal lines that express measurement, this indicates hot and cold. Depending on the higher and lower levels, we understand temperature. Where does hot and cold begin and end? For some this is questionable, the same may be expressed with sharp and dull, high and low etc.

The poles of understanding are an expression of the choices we make according to the correspondence of the data/information/knowledge processes.

Arriving at an understanding of why things happen (cause and effect) is crucial IMO. The inter-connectivity between the two previously mentioned principles is evident.

Causes have effects and effects have causes. The forward thinking information manager of this century is neither a left or right oriented thinker. This person is a visual mapper, a whole brained thinker who understands there is a process approach to expressing system using the tools, methods and mindset of visual mapping.

There is indeed a greater understanding of the implications of the monetized aspect of what we may call the information economy, and I firmly believe it is prudent to entertain the three principles mentioned.

“Information becomes knowledge, and did you know; it makes you more valuable when you apply it”

Wallace Tait: Visualmapper

Goalscape is a project Marcus first conceived 1998, when he wanted to deal with the complexities of sailing in a visual way. Since December 2008 he has been driving it forward with a great international team of co-creators based in Kiel (Marcus Baur), London (Richard Parslow), Bratislava (Tomas Lehuta & Franto Kormanak), Mumbai (Dr Malav Shroff) and Sydney (Emmett Lazich); and others; See HERE

Of Goalscape and Goalscape Connect Marcus says “it’s cool to live in times where this sort of collaboration is possible”.

As well as being a fully trained architect, Marcus is an accomplished professional sailor, having competed in the Sydney 2000 Olympics (5th place) and in Athens 2004 (9th place). Along the way he won 3 European Championships with two different crews (credits to Philip and Max) and finished in the top 5 at the World Championships 5 times.

His work at www.informationtamers.com is fantastic; being IMO, the most extensive “FREE” wiki containing a database of information and knowledge of all things relating to the tools, methods and Mindset of Mind-Visual and Knowledge mapping/management.  Roy is the go to guy of Visual mapping.

It is my pleasure to make Roy’s guest post available to you here at Hypershifters and also at Visualmapper.

Wallace Tait: Visualmapper

This is a guest post from Roy Grubb.

Visual thinking is slowly gaining recognition and traction. Slooowly. Much too slowly. Those of us who have used visual methods for decades, know the scope, depth and sheer fun of the many techniques and we know the advantages missed by the many people who aren’t using them yet.

One of the reasons? The words we use: Mind maps, visual maps, information maps, mindscapes, concept maps, idea maps, visual thinking – there isn’t one that really fits all needs, though I’ve seen a few collaborative attempts to run one down.

Want another reason for slow adoption? The mapping fundamentalists who boldly assert that theirs is the only form that’s worth considering.

There’s a broad landscape of visual methods and mapping styles — and I believe nearly all have value in the right circumstances.

Click the above image to see the map in Mindjet’s Player (Flash). Other versions available: Full-size PNG image – Mindjet’s Player (PDF – Acrobat only) – MindManager .mmap file.

So I decided to map out that landscape, challenge some of the myth-makers and set up some pointers of where to go for more information. There’s a lot more to visual thinking than you’ll find here, but this post is just about maps, because they are powerful tools.

For details you’ll have to go to WikIT , the wiki dedicated to all forms of information mapping with a visual slant. This is accessible to all, no subscription needed, no long sales page, not even a request for your email address. That’s because the purpose of WikIT is to make knowledge of mapping techniques available to as many people as possible, without reservation.

In this post, I’ve added links to specific pieces there so that you can explore for more detail, but to see its full scope you can peek at the contents list.

Mind mapping
Mind mapping seems like good place to start, because it’s one of the better known. Tony Buzan claims to have named them first. He has published rules that he says a map should follow before it can be called a mind map.

But maps that don’t fit the Buzan formula are now often called “mind maps”. Maybe they have straight lines, use boxes or bubbles for nodes, have a lot of text in each box, or do not use color or images. Spider diagrams, idea maps, bubble charts and others are widely referred to as mind maps. Buzan-qualified instructors are often jump in with tweets or comments on blogs to say that these are not mind maps. Too late: The term is out in the wild (btw although ‘Mind Maps’ is indeed a registered trademark, it applies only to training courses).

It is useful to be able to distinguish the types of mind maps. WikIT, the mapping wiki, makes the distinction by referring to “Buzan mind maps” and “common mind maps”.

What identifies all of these is that they start with a main topic and everything hangs off that in a hierarchy. Usually, the main topic is in the center.

Mind maps are good, amongst other uses, for breaking a topic into its parts – those parts into smaller ones and so on. Say you have an idea for a new business. You put a working name for the business in the center of a large sheet and you can quickly sketch in the services to be offered, radiating out around that. Against each service you can add items for needs, sources, differentiation from competitors, market research and niches to target, funding ideas, and costs.

The radial form makes it keep an overview and the focus on the center. It also makes it easy to make insertions at the right point. These are very appealing in comparison with a written list. Lists work well when planning is complete and the plan is being executed, but at the open-ended, thinking stage, an open diagram can help to bring out new thoughts. This is true for many people – it’s not guaranteed, but unless you have tried seriously, you may not know you’re missing an opportunity.
Mind maps are good for arranging information for learning. Again the hierarchical breakdown appears, this time for organizing notes and grouping related topics together. The mental process of organizing helps with understanding and remembering.

In a Buzan mind map, each node will comprise just one or two words. Many Buzan advocates say “only one”, but the examples that come with his own software (iMindMap) include examples with as many as five words.

The reason given for this rule is that writing a phrase can finish the thought while breaking the phrase into keywords and then looking for intermediate junctions can suggest other lines of thought and open up your thinking. In my experience it works very well in some cases. My argument with it is that it is presented by some of the gurus as the only way to make mind maps.

Here is an example of the benefits of bypassing the guideline in very different circumstances taken from a mind map summarizing the basic commands for editing Wikipedia. At the third level and beyond, substantial editing guidelines are given. Breaking these into single words would get in the way for readers trying to use this is a quick reference source.

For more about mind maps: WikIT has What is a mind map? / Buzan mind maps / Buzan’s mind map guidelines in practical use / Common mind maps / Large mind maps and more.

I use mind maps of all types and find them stimulating to use. I had a great time making the mind map “Mapping: So many options” that was the starting point for this article.

Concept mapping
Then there are concept maps. These describe relationships between things – ideas, abstract concepts, places, substances or names of a material object.

If you want to be sure you understand a subject, or have a student prove to you that she has a grasp of a topic, they do a great job. And they have been widely accepted in the field of knowledge management, where groups work together to create knowledge on concept maps.

Defining characteristics:

• Concept maps sometimes start with a “focus question” which tells you what the concept map is about – the question it was made to answer;
• The main subject is usually at the top;
• Nodes are boxes containing an idea, object name or concept;
• Associated nodes are connected by a line with a “linking phrase” between;
• Any node may be connected to any other node (it is a graph), so a concept map need not be limited to a tree topology.

If you want to organize files, notes and web shortcuts, allowing “any node may be connected to any other node” is particularly useful because you are not limited to placing a link under one parent. Multiple paths may lead to the same item and this reflects a basic reality of documents: They often relate to two or more topics.

The value of concept maps in demonstrating knowledge is that they are made up of propositions that may be verified. Each triplet of concept – linking phrase – concept can be extracted and discussed. So if a tutor found this on part of a student’s concept map: A node “Sydney”, connected to a node “Australia” by a linking phrase “is the capital of” she would know that the student had not mastered this aspect of the topic. The proposition can be read as “Sydney is the capital of Australia” and this mistake would show that a student had not grasped the difference between a financial center and a capital.

Concept maps are used in business to collect and record knowledge where subject experts discuss much more subtle propositions than the example just given.

For more about concept maps, WikIT has Concept maps, and Concept maps or mind maps? the choice, which are good starting points.

Skimming through more map types

Tree diagrams and organigrams (organization charts) are used in business to represent business functions and units and show the hierarchy of reporting. These are one of the most familiar visual forms. Tree diagrams on WikIT.

Mindscapes are unlike mind maps in several ways, but they share attributes like color, images, visual expression of ideas and organic or natural feel, all aimed at inspiring creative thinking. WikIT has an extensive and stimulating article by Nancy Marguilies, the noted proponent of Mindscapes.

Cluster maps are one of the early forms of graphic organizer used in schools and still work well for beginners. Using clusters of Post-It tags on the desk or wall allows for continuous change as the map develops, and can be drawn up as a mind map when the beginning mapper feels confident. Clustering on WikIT.

Visual thinking aids are used in teaching thinking in schools. A superb collection of these aids is at Exploratree, a website with 23 mind-jogger diagrams. Many of them will be useful to creatives and critical thinkers of all ages. More about visual thinking guides on WikIT.

Flowcharts, swimlane charts, control flow diagrams and other step-by-step diagrams are used to document and envision behavior, decisions and processes. These are often prepared in black and white, but purposeful use of color, shading and shadows can enliven them and improve their ability to communicate. Flowcharts on WikIT.

Southbeach notation is a visualization and extension of TRIZ in map form. It’s for problem solving, innovation and product improvement. The visual components of Southbeach notation help in analyzing details of a problem: What might be changed, the negative and positive aspects of the present situation and of the proposed changes, and the causes and effects of elements on one another. This is another whole post, though. The example is from Jangan Dabla and here is Southbeach notation on WikIT.

Annular maps maintain a strong focus on the central subject. In concentric rings around that, subsidiary thoughts or goals are arranged. Annular maps on WikIT.

Isomaps If you have time, patience and the skill, you may want to try these technically-advanced isometric projection maps developed by Arnaud Velten. As far as I know there is no application developed to make these, you’d have to use image manipulation software.

Why map?

Thinking, learning, organizing, problem solving, presenting, analyzing. planning, managing, creating, innovating, … there’s no end to ways of using these maps. WikIT has an article on this – “Uses of information maps”.

and Paul Forman (Mindmapinspiration) has an entertaining list (yes, a list) of 100 reasons to mind map. He uses “mind map” in the Buzan sense. The tragedy is that few appreciate just how many uses there are.

How should you make the map?
The options are hand-drawn maps, computer-based maps and maps made on smart-phones. Oh, and Post-It tags (see Cluster maps above).

I started back in the 1970s when making maps by hand was the only way – there was no software for mind maps then. My experience has been that hand-drawn maps are better for personal creativity, reinforcing memory, and if you have some artistic talent, for inspiring others. They are limited when the map is expanding rapidly, or has changed a lot over time, but the flexibility of layout is enviable when compared with most mind mapping software.

Map changes and expansion are not always a problem, because re-drawing a map that has become too big for its paper, or too messy, can bring out new ideas.

If you are an artist of limited ability your strained drawings and messy writing may be inhibiting if you’re working in front of others. Working with a projected computer mind map may then be quicker and more comfortable.

Making maps on a computer is good when the map will expand and change continuously. It is better for readability, and allows something that is impossible with hand-drawn maps: Organizing attachments, notes, computer files and website links. Images are easy to find and add as well.
Organizing your thoughts on the computer gives you more freedom to move sections round as the thinking develops.

Computer based maps may limit your ability to express yourself when creativity is what you aim for. WikIT has a list with screenshots of free mapping software of many types.

Making maps on smart-phones has become popular because of the convenience of mapping anywhere – even standing up. The screen size makes it a limited, but most software allows exporting maps for later work on your computer. WikIT covers mobile mind mapping applications as well. So keep your options loose – a hand-drawn mind map, computer made one, smartphone, iPad, … your needs and resources will change from tasks to task and suit different purposes.

Some people even add hand-drawn map sections to computer made maps and find it useful.

Do read the comments here for a variety of opinions on hand-drawn maps.

Who is the map for? Who will make it?
Unless it’s just for you alone, the audience for your map will affect the tools you use, the style and type of map.

If it is for a scattered group, then one of the collaborative tools like bubbl.us or Mindmeister may be helpful. If it is for a group gathered together, your options will be wide open and you can consider the next section.

How long have you got to make it?
In a meeting, a flipchart or whiteboard may be quickest and it will certainly be best if you are able to own the room, work the meeting, and inspire the group with your brilliant sketches and color.

If you can type quickly and are familiar with the operation of specific software, then a laptop and projector will beat handwriting for speed and may be more suitable in a conservative business setting.

How will you make it exciting?
For memory, inspiration and creativity, color, pictures, sketches and icons make a real contribution. Just take a glance at Nancy Margulies Mindscapes to see that. Even if you are involved in a business planning or knowledge management project, icons and colors can make finding what you want on the map quicker, but do pre-arrange a coherent color plan and make sure everyone involved knows what the colors represent.

The One Map Guys
Some will try to persuade you that only one type of map works, and that type works best in all circumstances.

Sometimes this is because only the type of map they promote can be produced by something they have to sell.

Sometimes it’s because they have only ever used one type of map and never seriously explored others.

Often it’s because their background means that they view maps through a particular lens: They are in knowledge management and believe that only concept maps work. They give seminars on creativity and value colors and pictures highly without regard to other uses. They only use maps for business analysis and think colors and pictures are frivolous. They are project managers and believe that only maps made with software with added task information are useful. They are teachers and believe that only hand-drawn maps work.

Be skeptical of claims that “there’s only one way”!

Know the options, know what is best for which circumstances and be willing to try new methods. And happy mapping!
___________________________________________________________________________

Roy Grubb FBCS CITP MCMI is a management consultant specializing in the visual organization of information, knowledge, ideas, information systems and business projects. He founded G&A Management Consultants Ltd. http://www.gandanet.com.hk/ in Hong Kong in 1981 and has undertaken assignments in USA, Japan, Singapore, Malaysia, Philippines, France, Scandanavia, Ireland and Hong Kong. His company was responsible for the development of 3D Topicscape and Roy was project manager for this mapping-based information organizer.

He has used mind mapping and similar techniques since the 1970s in his business and his private life and is the principal editor of WikIT.

A social media and Mind-Visual mapping professional practitioner and consultant; Pascal is a fellow Visual mapping colleague and is integral to the furtherance of this arena. Wallace Tait: Visualmapper

I was really delighted when Wallace Tait invided me to write a guest post for both Visualmapper and Hypershifters. Accepting to write a post is one thing, coming up with an idea is another one. As I had difficulties in this respect, I I decided to ask my Twitter network if anyone could suggest a good theme. One of my tweeple, @marionchapsal, a very keen mindmapper herself, suggested that, as an historian, I perhaps ought to write something about the history of visual mapping. I immediately thought this was a superb idea. On thinking about it further, I however very quickly realised that this was perhaps more tricky than I initially thought. As this was outside my real area of expertise, it would certainly take a considerable amount of background research.

In quite a typical way of how Twitter can contribute to help with the generation of ideas, I however just as quickly came up with a way to go round this problem. Firstly, I remembered reading a tweet by @pgsimoes who was drawing attention to a new web 2.0 site, Timetoast, which makes it easy to create and share timelines online. I was already familiar with the SIMILE software, which allows for the creation of web widgets for visualising temporal data, but had been hoping for a while, that such a software hosted in the cloud would become available, as I could see a real potential for it and it would be very useful for me in connection with my history teaching at the university. Secondly, in another tweet, Wallace Tait, the Visualmapper himself, had also recently pointed towards a post on Philippe Boukozba’s blog about “A visual map created by Walt Disney 53 years ago“. From those two tweets came the idea of preparing this timeline in a very collaborative way by conducting a little experiment in crowdsourcing.

It is necessary to start this mindmap somewhere and a couple of blog posts provide us with a starting point, namely Michael Tipper’s Tony Buzan did not invent Mind Mapping! and Origins of Mindmapping software. I shall limit my own contribution to only one date, which would be Joseph Novak’s Concept Map (1972).

What I would therefore like to do is to ask the readers of both the Visualmapper and the Hypershifters to tell us, what they consider as the most significant dates in the history of visual mapping broadly defined and to provide pertinent links to accompanying illustrations and documents on the web. It would have been nice to create such a timeline on Timetoast, but it will unfortunately not be possible, as it is currently necessary to have a precise date to enter, which includes not only a year, but also a day and a month, and such data will probably not be available for some of the entries. It will therefore probably be best to present the timeline in question in the form of a mind map.

The first iteration looked like this.

And the current version looks like this;

What would you suggest adding? It is possible to directly make changes to the map, using Mindmeister’s wikimap function, if you already have an account or create one for this purpose. An other option is to suggest additions in the comments of this blog post.

Contextualized knowledge mapping on steroids. Google just acquired MetaWeb, and this inclusion may just make Google the unbeatable 900 lb gorilla of search engines.

The implications are numerous, but I see a more contextual search within the web; based on generalizations that are attached to contextualized entities.

An ingenious idea indeed. We see this approach in Knowledge management products such as TopicScape and The Personal Brain that use relational data bases.

This is also a rather good model for Mind-Visual mapping practices. What do you think?

Wallace Tait: Visualmapper

Olin is a results-driven, technology sales and marketing professional with experience building market presence and success for emerging companies. He has demonstrated ability to drive strong and sustainable revenue growth in both domestic and international markets. Olin has for the last 3 years been the General Manager of CS Odessa in the Americas, an innovative developer of visual personal productivity products based in the Ukraine, whose responsibilities include sales, channel development and marketing for the Americas.

Prior to CS Odessa, Olin was responsible for sales at Mindjet for the Americas and Asia Pacific for nearly 5 years. Olin has had a number of senor sales, marketing and business development roles in companies ranging in size from Fortune 500 to start-up. Olin is also a frequent contributor to the CS Odessa company blog “CSO: The World of ConceptDraw Products” at http://mapthink.blogspot.com/ and can be reached at oreams@csodessa.com.  Wallace Tait: Visualmapper

The Human Side of Data

Mind mapping. Visual mapping. Business mapping. These are all information management strategies that have a bit of a relationship to one another. The primary focus behind each of them is to get something accomplished—create a process, make a plan. There are lots of tools that can help with this—each of which might present information in different graphical forms. Software applications that map out processes and plans using a radial format, though, have been getting lots of attention lately. Users say there’s something about them that seems to make it easier to think quickly, creatively, and strategically.

Visual information mapping applications can be used to do an endless variety of things: from managing new product releases or developing a testing process to planning a home remodel or writing a novel. But if I was to put my finger on the one general thing they do very well, I would say it is to organize human thinking in a visual format that‘s easy to grasp, and that puts the content into a hierarchical order that allows you to use and reuse the information to do your job more creatively and efficiently.

User testing versus lab testing:

I’ll be the first to agree that very little hard scientific evidence supports my contention about the value of radial placement of information or mind mapping. But there is lots of very positive user feedback. Three such comments in particular give me the confidence I need to market and sell this kind of software—which I’ve been doing successfully for the past ten years.

The first comment is one I hear a lot when I ask users if they’ve told other people about mindmapping: “Are you kidding? This is my secret advantage, my competitive edge. Why would I want to level the playing field?”

Then there is the blunt, but very human, observation from dedicated mind mappers that they don’t want to introduce the software into their organizations because “my company doesn’t deserve the benefits you get from mind mapping.”

And then there was the sort of compliment my wife permitted mind mapping tools. My wife is a huge auto racing fan – and of one team in particular. One evening I came home and told her I’d learned that a rival racing team had bought a copy of our mind mapping software and were probably going to use it to work through their race and preparation strategies. Unbeknownst to me, my wife bought a copy of our product and sent it, along with a note, to her team—explaining that she suggested they use it to plan smarter race strategies. But she never heard back from them. Maybe it’s just a coincidence that this same team has since had to merge and be reorganized. Maybe they never installed her gift.

A Short List of Criteria
With all of the visual mapping, mind mapping and business mapping solutions on the market, how do you know which one’s best suited to your needs? Based on my experience I have four suggestions for people considering different applications.

1)      The product has to be comfortable for you. Does it work the way you want it to work? Does the operation seem logical? Many products have two or three ways to accomplish the same goal. Is there a way that works for you?  Be wary of marketing spin. Trust your gut instincts.

2)      If you think you’ll need help, make sure you can get it from a human. Most companies say they provide “support.” Find out exactly what that means. For starters, see if you can get someone from the company to have a meaningful email or phone conversation with you about whether their product will meet your needs? Find out if the support you get before the sale resembles in any way, shape or form the support you can expect afterwards?

3)      Find out if the company is planning ahead. The product might meet my needs for the present time. But will it adapt to future requirements that may become standard? CS Odessa, for example, greatly extended ConceptDraw MINDMAP capability by integrating it into the ConceptDraw Office suite. This integration enables users to move seamlessly from project inception, to detailed planning, to comprehensive reporting and even to documentation. Our InGyre technology allows you to work the way you want to work, during every step of the process. Recently, CS Odessa has also introduced new collaborative technology based on Google Wave that enable groups of any size to work together in a shared, same-time edit mode to collect and organize the combined intelligence of the group.

4)      Finally, understand your total cost of ownership. What are you getting and what is it going to cost you? If 1, 2 and 3 are in place; then it is important to look at how much it’s going to cost you over time to use and maintain the application.

With so many choices on the market, it can be hard for someone to decide which product is right for them. Price is always an important consideration. The bottom line is to understand what you need in a product, compare alternatives against a clear—and short—list of criteria, and then make your best decision. Of course I always suggest you start looking here http://www.conceptdraw.com

“DON’T BELIEVE ALL YOU READ”

I was recently reading an article by Jim Giles, in the New Scientist [May 2010] called “Giving Life to a Lie”. In it he quotes a story written by an Australian Journalist, Piers Akerman for the Daily Telegraph (2006) where Akerman claimed that global warming was exaggerated. Now it was not that fact that caught my attention but rather the reference he attributed to John Houghton, a former chair to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which was “unless we announce disasters no one will listen”.

This reference was picked up by a journalist in Canada followed later by an academic in Michigan. Giles goes on the say that today there at least three books, 100 blogs and 24,000 web pages that in some way cite Houghton’s original book published in 1994. The really interesting thing is that Houghton seems never to have uttered those words in his life and they certainly do not appear in that book!!

Perhaps Akerman made a genuine mistake, perhaps he intentionally manufactured the quote … I do not know and do not really care. However, my point is based on the thought that I wonder just how common is changing a lie or a misrepresentation into a “known fact”? How many of the statements which are taken for granted and quoted as “proof”, really have a firm basis?

I know I have jokingly said, when watching a somewhat dubious documentary on TV: “Well it must be true because it is in colour”. A silly statement certainly, but it is really based on the premise that many of us have a tendance to believe a fact if it is printed and from an apparently reputable source. A good example is Wikipedia, which many people use as a first source of reference these days. However, you should remember that this excellent online resource can be edited by just about any Tom, Dick or Harry. Certainly, I do know there are editorial controls, but Wikipedia contents cannot, in reality, be guaranteed as accurate.

The theme of the whole New Scientist issue was “Denial” in various forms. Only thing is clear that often people will simply deny an inconvenient fact (or truth) as a way of refuting a particular point of view rather that offering persuasive counter argument. A perfect example of this was Copernicus’s trial by the Catholic Church when he offered evidence that the earth revolved around the sun. The Church’s response was an absolute denial that this could be possible as it went against current teachings.

The point is that we should be careful when reading or writing blogs for two reasons:
1. Question if an assertion we read or make is founded in fact or just “parroted” because it has become “conventional wisdom”?
2. To avoid or be very wary of flat, unsupported denials as they can be a smokescreen for either a subtext or even pure ignorance

Perhaps an additional guideline would be to reserve comment for times when such comments makes a positive contribution to the discussion.

Some food for thought

As both Visualmapper and Hypershifters are concerned with visual thinking, information handling and associated topics, here are some points worth considering:

1. Do diagrams aid understanding?
2. Is a picture worth a thousand words?
3. How important is colour and curved lines in left & right cortex linking?
4. Are mind maps the best way to represent the majority of business information?
5. Is Cloud computing the way of the future?
6. You cannot beat face-to-face communication
Can you think of some statements or “facts” which we take for granted?

John England: MindSystems