Outrageous Hypocrisy in Source Codes

During the construction phase, potential hypocrisy can arise due to flawed system models or cost-driven design assessments, creating obstacles. A lack of systems thinking can alter source code functionalities within Management Teams.

Example 1: An operational system may focus on cost-effective outputs without considering feedback-seeking behavior, such as learning and performance goal orientation. Logical consequences must be assessed to define source code requirements before implementing UML object algorithms.

Example 2: Operational systems may reveal contradictions between Strategic Planning Systems (specific inputs) and resulting output patterns.

During the maintenance phase, hypocrisy can surface when cost-driven modifications eliminate or alter processes to satisfy external forces.

 

Case Study 1: System Synchronization and Maintenance

 

A system platform requires synchronization of components and modules based on accumulated case study data every two weeks. Components operate in default mode, mirroring natural system behaviors. However, cost-reducing strategies in the maintenance phase can extend the data analysis period from two weeks to three weeks.

 

To sustain financial gains, Systems Owners may implement operational changes:

 

1-Reducing time series analysis in case studies to cut costs, potentially lowering service quality.

2-Cutting labor and overhead expenses, increasing social complexities.

3-Operational changes can modify product functionalities, affecting operational efficiency.

4-Suboptimal performances on routines can shorten product lifecycles to maintain competitive advantages, leading to customer dissatisfaction.

 

The disparity between default and modified maintenance conditions fosters Outrageous Hypocrisy in source codes. This complexity can introduce partial open-loop cycles, necessitating sub-optimization for short-term performance stabilization. (Figure 1)

  

Case Study 2: Time-to-Market (TTM) Strategy

Manufacturers prioritize rapid market entry to gain a competitive advantage (TTM), emphasizing short-term profitability, return on investment (ROI), and innovation speed.

TTM strategies may encourage customers to self-test products, reducing enterprise assessment costs. Customers may return faulty products up to three times, receiving VIP status if persistent issues remain. Error reports direct products to specialized departments for analysis and improvement.

While enterprises strive to enhance customer engagement, such models are often inconvenient and impractical, as they require voluntary customer participation. Poor-quality products can burden customers financially and degrade Customer Value Propositions. (Figure 2)

                                                                                

 

Observation:

 

1-TTM Hypocrisy: Occurs when Systems Owners acknowledge customer dissatisfaction yet accept paradoxical operational outcomes. While enterprises claim customer satisfaction as a global strategy, actual results often contradict this objective, highlighting a systemic contradiction.

 

2-Sub-Optimization and Short-Term Gains: Sub-optimization prioritizes short-term benefits over long-term stability. Exploring this approach allows Systems Owners to mitigate Outrageous Hypocrisy temporarily. Two primary scenarios emerge from sub-optimization:

 

2.1-Best-case scenario: Short-term gains with long-term uncertainty contingent on rational perceptions.

2.2-Worst-case scenario: Unfold through three interconnected stages:

2.2.1- Short-term losses, high costs, and minimal benefits lead to complexities of multiple identities (Open-loop Cycle).

2.2.2- Open-loop cycles trigger new sub-optimization intervals, perpetuating outdated complexities.

2.2.3- Repetitive open-loop cycles in multidisciplinary sub-optimization designs exacerbate systemic complexities.

 

3-Product Lifetime Constraints: Limiting product lifespan can increase economic efficiency but is an example of economic hypocrisy, maximizing profits at the expense of loyal customers.

 

4-The Hypocrisy Instinct: Algorithmic codes beyond instinct can activate and perpetuate in the Subconscious Component due to defense mechanisms for personal gain, competitive advantage, and productivity. Systems Owners of Multinational Enterprise may exploit this instinct to sustain market dominance, national security, and global economic stability.

 

5-Deceptive Algorithms and Social Complexity: Global variables embedded in deceitful algorithms can disrupt social contexts and create unintended consequences in Biological and Non-Biological Systems.

 

6-Disaster Potential in Construction Phases: Introducing Outrageous Hypocrisy during construction can lead to catastrophic failures. For instance, due to deceptive planning codes, aerospace system malfunctions may result in severe human casualties.

 

Conclusion:

Addressing and reducing hypocrisy in system design and maintenance is essential for ethical progress, technological advancement, and the sustainable integrity of operations, ultimately safeguarding human lives and minimizing unnecessary burdens in system platforms.