58 - Tacksam för kommentarer och hjälp att vidarebefordra texten till Vineet Nayar, HCLT

Yes, MR. Nayar, the EFCS-thought is good!
Instead of follow up with a "but" I have depth and interpret your thought from my point of view: The theory of knowledge. I am a Ph.d and my focus is on "the specialist as a spectator and a scanner of the task". So when you named "value zon" I have named the "nod" between twig and leaf (task and specialist)": And what you named negatively "employee attrition" have I named positively "knowledge attrition", because it is when we analyze, considerate, acknowledge our statement in an attrition with other specialist or customers about the task, the "task in itself" will be better treat. When reading your book I have made 48 such remarks in this ambition, to depth and interpret and give a knowledge perspective on your text.

My language of thought is Swedish. And I am very good to find toughtsystem like yours in a text of English or find Immanuel Kants toughtsystem in a text of German. But I am not a specialist neither to write nor speak English or German. I hope you will apply your catalyst "see behind the mountain" to realize that thought are stronger than language barriers.

In fact of all the good you say about the interactions system in HCLT I have confidence that this text will reach you. And in confidence of your search and found of upside/down-thought I am confidence that you will see the possibilities to strengthen up your systems with catalysts from the perspective of knowledge. I hope someone will fine a way to communicate all my 48 comments to you.