The Complexify Lab: Business Model Canvas

Overview of the business model

  • Proposed beachhead sector & paying clients: military, law-enforcement, and security & espionage agencies; stakeholders where the management of risk and other security, but not immediately criminal, matters are an ongoing concern

  • Objectives: create intuitive and arational thinking-spaces capable of strategising longer-term than traditional and shorter democratic cycles, in order to prevent future Ukraines and other structured geopolitical dislocations, at the same as preserving and nourishing the longitudinal sociopolitical conditions which resilient and healthy democracies require. Other complex problems such as climate change and water security (to name just two) may also be in scope for such organisations and agencies

Some recent thoughts of mine in respect of the business model of “Complexify Me”, and related matters

Here I propose a Two-Business structure and relationship:

Business One. A subsidiary of more or less autonomous entity, located in Ireland and exclusively focused on delivering “intuition validation engine”-powered products with existing tech software and hardware architectures:

  • Innovation to Invention ratio: 5 to 0

  • Privacy level: privacy-sensitive (or less)

  • US big-tech, Irish-located partners and investment, with Irish, US and UK agency & government stakeholders and related clients

  • I'm of a mind for this to be a mostly or entirely autonomous operation of the AB holding located in Sweden in operations, as long as the focus and mission throughout is sharply on innovating “intuition validation” within the boundaries of total surveillance-compliant technologies, current IT architectures of admin/user, and existing principles of chip architectures and similar

  • Business relationship with the Sweden-located holding and research lab: licensee

Review the Workstream A page

Business Two. The Sweden-located holding would then be entirely focused on Workstreams C and D — secrecy-sensitive and secrecy-positive respectively, with their corresponding architectural starting-from-scratch approach:

Review the Workstream C page

Review the Workstream D page

Workstream B would consequently serve as a point of encounter — and also departure, in a way, for some involved — which would feel comfortable for Workstream A stakeholders and partners in 0 Invention tech spaces, but would equally allow them from their positions of entirely safe orthodoxy to begin to acquire practical notions and interpretations of “intuition validation” principles, being developed more strategically in Workstreams C and D. In D, for example, we're talking of an Innovation to Invention ratio of 0 to 5.

So here we have Workstream B — serving the purpose of a commonality between Ratio 5:0 in favour of Innovation (Workstream A) at one end of the technology-development spectrum and Ratio 0:5 in favour of Invention (Workstream D) at the other:

Review the Workstream B page

Business Model Canvas — “Complexify Me” Ireland

Business Model Canvas — “Complexify Me Holding & Lab” Sweden, plus its Partners of choice

Like to find out more — or just engage and comment?

Scroll down and click the contact button — or find me on LinkedIn:

Whether you’d like to join one of the Workstreams or the wider project in some capacity, take part more deeply in some way, or just have some observations you feel could — or maybe should — be made, please do engage in the way you feel most comfortable.

Mil Williams, Founder and Tech Thinker:

“Then there are other big challenges such as climate change which seem to escape our capacity to resolve them coherently when, mainly, we have chosen historically to simplify in order to solve what we can, instead of complexify in order to deal with what we must.”