What is a good project manager? Reconceptualizing the “do” : an Aristotelian perspective

In Social Science (Organization Studies, Economics, Management Science, Strategy, International Relations, Political Science…) the quest for addressing the question “what is a good practitioner?” has been around for centuries, with the underlying assumptions that good practitioners should lead organizations to higher levels of performance. Hence to ask “what is a good “captain”?” is not a new question, we should add! (e.g. Tsoukas & Cummings, 1997, p. 670; Söderlund, 2004, p. 190). This interrogation leads to consider problems such as the relations between dichotomies Theory and Practice, rigor and relevance of research, ways of knowing and knowledge forms. On the one hand we face the “Enlightenment” assumptions underlying modern positivist Social science, grounded in “unity-of-science dream of transforming and reducing all kinds of knowledge to one basic form and level” and cause-effects relationships (Eikeland, 2012, p. 20), and on the other, the postmodern interpretivist proposal, and its “tendency to make all kinds of knowing equivalent” (Eikeland, 2012, p. 20). In the project management space, this aims at addressing one of the fundamental problems in the field: projects still do not deliver their expected benefits and promises and therefore the socio-economical good (Hodgson & Cicmil, 2007; Bredillet, 2010, Lalonde et al., 2012). The Cartesian tradition supporting projects research and practice for the last 60 years (Bredillet, 2010, p. 4) has led to the lack of relevance to practice of the current conceptual base of project management, despite the sum of research, development of standards, best & good practices and the related development of project management bodies of knowledge (Packendorff, 1995, p. 319-323; Cicmil & Hodgson, 2006, p. 2–6, Hodgson & Cicmil, 2007, p. 436–7; Winter et al., 2006, p. 638). Referring to both Hodgson (2002) and Giddens (1993), we could say that “those who expect a “social-scientific Newton” to revolutionize this young field “are not only waiting for a train that will not arrive, but are in the wrong station altogether” (Hodgson, 2002, p. 809; Giddens, 1993, p. 18). While, in the postmodern stream mainly rooted in the “practice turn” (e.g. Hällgren & Lindahl, 2012), the shift from methodological individualism to social viscosity and the advocated pluralism lead to reinforce the “functional stupidity” (Alvesson & Spicer, 2012, p. 1194) this postmodern stream aims at overcoming. We suggest here that addressing the question “what is a good PM?” requires a philosophy of practice perspective to complement the “usual” philosophy of science perspective. The questioning of the modern Cartesian tradition mirrors a similar one made within Social science (Say, 1964; Koontz, 1961, 1980; Menger, 1985; Warry, 1992; Rothbard, 1997a; Tsoukas & Cummings, 1997; Flyvbjerg, 2001; Boisot & McKelvey, 2010), calling for new thinking. In order to get outside the rationalist ‘box’, Toulmin (1990, p. 11), along with Tsoukas & Cummings (1997, p. 655), suggests a possible path, summarizing the thoughts of many authors: “It can cling to the discredited research program of the purely theoretical (i.e. “modern”) philosophy, which will end up by driving it out of business: it can look for new and less exclusively theoretical ways of working, and develop the methods needed for a more practical (“post-modern”) agenda; or it can return to its pre-17th century traditions, and try to recover the lost (“pre-modern”) topics that were side-tracked by Descartes, but can be usefully taken up for the future” (Toulmin, 1990, p. 11). Thus, paradoxically and interestingly, in their quest for the so-called post-modernism, many authors build on “pre-modern” philosophies such as the Aristotelian one (e.g. MacIntyre, 1985, 2007; Tsoukas & Cummings, 1997; Flyvbjerg, 2001; Blomquist et al., 2010; Lalonde et al., 2012). It is perhaps because the post-modern stream emphasizes a dialogic process restricted to reliance on voice and textual representation, it limits the meaning of communicative praxis, and weaking the practice because it turns away attention from more fundamental issues associated with problem-definition and knowledge-for-use in action (Tedlock, 1983, p. 332–4; Schrag, 1986, p. 30, 46–7; Warry, 1992, p. 157). Eikeland suggests that the Aristotelian “gnoseology allows for reconsidering and reintegrating ways of knowing: traditional, practical, tacit, emotional, experiential, intuitive, etc., marginalised and considered insufficient by modernist [and post-modernist] thinking” (Eikeland, 2012, p. 20—21). By contrast with the modernist one-dimensional thinking and relativist and pluralistic post-modernism, we suggest, in a turn to an Aristotelian pre-modern lens, to re-conceptualise (“re” involving here a “re”-turn to pre-modern thinking) the “do” and to shift the perspective from what a good PM is (philosophy of science lens) to what a good PM does (philosophy of practice lens) (Aristotle, 1926a). As Tsoukas & Cummings put it: “In the Aristotelian tradition to call something good is to make a factual statement. To ask, for example, ’what is a good captain’?’ is not to come up with a list of attributes that good captains share (as modem contingency theorists would have it), but to point out the things that those who are recognized as good captains do.” (Tsoukas & Cummings, 1997, p. 670) Thus, this conversation offers a dialogue and deliberation about a central question: What does a good project manager do? The conversation is organized around a critic of the underlying assumptions supporting the modern, post-modern and pre-modern relations to ways of knowing, forms of knowledge and “practice”.

Prolegomenon to the study of the concepts of maturity and maturity model : from Black Horse to White Knight?

This paper takes its root in a trivial observation: management approaches are unable to provide relevant guidelines to cope with uncertainty, and trust of our modern worlds. Thus, managers are looking for reducing uncertainty through information’s supported decision-making, sustained by ex-ante rationalization. They strive to achieve best possible solution, stability, predictability, and control of “future”. Hence, they turn to a plethora of “prescriptive panaceas”, and “management fads” to bring simple solutions through best practices. However, these solutions are ineffective. They address only one part of a system (e.g. an organization) instead of the whole. They miss the interactions and interdependencies with other parts leading to “suboptimization”. Further classical cause-effects investigations and researches are not very helpful to this regard. Where do we go from there? In this conversation, we want to challenge the assumptions supporting the traditional management approaches and shed some lights on the problem of management discourse fad using the concept of maturity and maturity models in the context of temporary organizations as support for reflexion. Global economy is characterized by use and development of standards and compliance to standards as a practice is said to enable better decision-making by managers in uncertainty, control complexity, and higher performance. Amongst the plethora of standards, organizational maturity and maturity models hold a specific place due to general belief in organizational performance as dependent variable of (business) processes continuous improvement, grounded on a kind of evolutionary metaphor. Our intention is neither to offer a new “evidence based management fad” for practitioners, nor to suggest research gap to scholars. Rather, we want to open an assumption-challenging conversation with regards to main stream approaches (neo-classical economics and organization theory), turning “our eyes away from the blinding light of eternal certitude towards the refracted world of turbid finitude” (Long, 2002, p. 44) generating what Bernstein has named “Cartesian Anxiety” (Bernstein, 1983, p. 18), and revisit the conceptualization of maturity and maturity models. We rely on conventions theory and a systemic-discursive perspective. These two lenses have both information & communication and self-producing systems as common threads. Furthermore the narrative approach is well suited to explore complex way of thinking about organizational phenomena as complex systems. This approach is relevant with our object of curiosity, i.e. the concept of maturity and maturity models, as maturity models (as standards) are discourses and systems of regulations. The main contribution of this conversation is that we suggest moving from a neo-classical “theory of the game” aiming at making the complex world simpler in playing the game, to a “theory of the rules of the game”, aiming at influencing and challenging the rules of the game constitutive of maturity models – conventions, governing systems – making compatible individual calculation and social context, and possible the coordination of relationships and cooperation between agents with or potentially divergent interests and values. A second contribution is the reconceptualization of maturity as structural coupling between conventions, rather than as an independent variable leading to organizational performance.

Improving robot vision models for object detection through interaction

We propose a method for learning specific object representations that can be applied (and reused) in visual detection and identification tasks. A machine learning technique called Cartesian Genetic Programming (CGP) is used to create these models based on a series of images. Our research investigates how manipulation actions might allow for the development of better visual models and therefore better robot vision. This paper describes how visual object representations can be learned and improved by performing object manipulation actions, such as, poke, push and pick-up with a humanoid robot. The improvement can be measured and allows for the robot to select and perform the `right' action, i.e. the action with the best possible improvement of the detector.

From vision to actions: Towards adaptive and autonomous humanoid robots

Although robotics research has seen advances over the last decades robots are still not in widespread use outside industrial applications. Yet a range of proposed scenarios have robots working together, helping and coexisting with humans in daily life. In all these a clear need to deal with a more unstructured, changing environment arises. I herein present a system that aims to overcome the limitations of highly complex robotic systems, in terms of autonomy and adaptation. The main focus of research is to investigate the use of visual feedback for improving reaching and grasping capabilities of complex robots. To facilitate this a combined integration of computer vision and machine learning techniques is employed. From a robot vision point of view the combination of domain knowledge from both imaging processing and machine learning techniques, can expand the capabilities of robots. I present a novel framework called Cartesian Genetic Programming for Image Processing (CGP-IP). CGP-IP can be trained to detect objects in the incoming camera streams and successfully demonstrated on many different problem domains. The approach requires only a few training images (it was tested with 5 to 10 images per experiment) is fast, scalable and robust yet requires very small training sets. Additionally, it can generate human readable programs that can be further customized and tuned. While CGP-IP is a supervised-learning technique, I show an integration on the iCub, that allows for the autonomous learning of object detection and identification. Finally this dissertation includes two proof-of-concepts that integrate the motion and action sides. First, reactive reaching and grasping is shown. It allows the robot to avoid obstacles detected in the visual stream, while reaching for the intended target object. Furthermore the integration enables us to use the robot in non-static environments, i.e. the reaching is adapted on-the- fly from the visual feedback received, e.g. when an obstacle is moved into the trajectory. The second integration highlights the capabilities of these frameworks, by improving the visual detection by performing object manipulation actions.

On the cubicity of bipartite graphs

A unit cube in k-dimension (or a k-cube) is defined as the Cartesian product R-1 x R-2 x ... x R-k, where each R-i is a closed interval on the real line of the form [a(j), a(i), + 1]. The cubicity of G, denoted as cub(G), is the minimum k such that G is the intersection graph of a collection of k-cubes. Many NP-complete graph problems can be solved efficiently or have good approximation ratios in graphs of low cubicity. In most of these cases the first step is to get a low dimensional cube representation of the given graph. It is known that for graph G, cub(G) <= left perpendicular2n/3right perpendicular. Recently it has been shown that for a graph G, cub(G) >= 4(Delta + 1) In n, where n and Delta are the number of vertices and maximum degree of G, respectively. In this paper, we show that for a bipartite graph G = (A boolean OR B, E) with |A| = n(1), |B| = n2, n(1) <= n(2), and Delta' = min {Delta(A),Delta(B)}, where Delta(A) = max(a is an element of A)d(a) and Delta(B) = max(b is an element of B) d(b), d(a) and d(b) being the degree of a and b in G, respectively , cub(G) <= 2(Delta' + 2) bar left rightln n(2)bar left arrow. We also give an efficient randomized algorithm to construct the cube representation of G in 3 (Delta' + 2) bar right arrowIn n(2)bar left arrow dimension. The reader may note that in general Delta' can be much smaller than Delta.

An upper bound for Cubicity in terms of Boxicity

An axis-parallel b-dimensional box is a Cartesian product R-1 x R-2 x ... x R-b where each R-i (for 1 <= i <= b) is a closed interval of the form [a(i), b(i)] on the real line. The boxicity of any graph G, box(G) is the minimum positive integer b such that G can be represented as the intersection graph of axis-parallel b-dimensional boxes. A b-dimensional cube is a Cartesian product R-1 x R-2 x ... x R-b, where each R-i (for 1 <= i <= b) is a closed interval of the form [a(i), a(i) + 1] on the real line. When the boxes are restricted to be axis-parallel cubes in b-dimension, the minimum dimension b required to represent the graph is called the cubicity of the graph (denoted by cub(G)). In this paper we prove that cub(G) <= inverted right perpendicularlog(2) ninverted left perpendicular box(G), where n is the number of vertices in the graph. We also show that this upper bound is tight.Some immediate consequences of the above result are listed below: 1. Planar graphs have cubicity at most 3inverted right perpendicularlog(2) ninvereted left perpendicular.2. Outer planar graphs have cubicity at most 2inverted right perpendicularlog(2) ninverted left perpendicular.3. Any graph of treewidth tw has cubicity at most (tw + 2) inverted right perpendicularlog(2) ninverted left perpendicular. Thus, chordal graphs have cubicity at most (omega + 1) inverted right erpendicularlog(2) ninverted left perpendicular and circular arc graphs have cubicity at most (2 omega + 1)inverted right perpendicularlog(2) ninverted left perpendicular, where omega is the clique number.

Cubicity, boxicity, and vertex cover

A k-dimensional box is the cartesian product R-1 x R-2 x ... x R-k where each R-i is a closed interval on the real line. The boxicity of a graph G,denoted as box(G), is the minimum integer k such that G is the intersection graph of a collection of k-dimensional boxes. A unit cube in k-dimensional space or a k-cube is defined as the cartesian product R-1 x R-2 x ... x R-k where each Ri is a closed interval on the real line of the form [a(i), a(i) + 1]. The cubicity of G, denoted as cub(G), is the minimum k such that G is the intersection graph of a collection of k-cubes. In this paper we show that cub(G) <= t + inverted right perpendicularlog(n - t)inverted left perpendicular - 1 and box(G) <= left perpendiculart/2right perpendicular + 1, where t is the cardinality of a minimum vertex cover of G and n is the number of vertices of G. We also show the tightness of these upper bounds. F.S. Roberts in his pioneering paper on boxicity and cubicity had shown that for a graph G, box(G) <= left perpendicularn/2right perpendicular and cub(G) <= inverted right perpendicular2n/3inverted left perpendicular, where n is the number of vertices of G, and these bounds are tight. We show that if G is a bipartite graph then box(G) <= inverted right perpendicularn/4inverted left perpendicular and this bound is tight. We also show that if G is a bipartite graph then cub(G) <= n/2 + inverted right perpendicularlog n inverted left perpendicular - 1. We point out that there exist graphs of very high boxicity but with very low chromatic number. For example there exist bipartite (i.e., 2 colorable) graphs with boxicity equal to n/4. Interestingly, if boxicity is very close to n/2, then chromatic number also has to be very high. In particular, we show that if box(G) = n/2 - s, s >= 0, then chi (G) >= n/2s+2, where chi (G) is the chromatic number of G.

On the Cubicity of Interval Graphs

A k-cube (or ``a unit cube in k dimensions'') is defined as the Cartesian product R-1 x . . . x R-k where R-i (for 1 <= i <= k) is an interval of the form [a(i), a(i) + 1] on the real line. The k-cube representation of a graph G is a mapping of the vertices of G to k-cubes such that the k-cubes corresponding to two vertices in G have a non-empty intersection if and only if the vertices are adjacent. The cubicity of a graph G, denoted as cub(G), is defined as the minimum dimension k such that G has a k-cube representation. An interval graph is a graph that can be represented as the intersection of intervals on the real line - i. e., the vertices of an interval graph can be mapped to intervals on the real line such that two vertices are adjacent if and only if their corresponding intervals overlap. We show that for any interval graph G with maximum degree Delta, cub(G) <= inverted right perpendicular log(2) Delta inverted left perpendicular + 4. This upper bound is shown to be tight up to an additive constant of 4 by demonstrating interval graphs for which cubicity is equal to inverted right perpendicular log(2) Delta inverted left perpendicular.

Minästä toiseen : Lacanilaisen subjektin syntymä Anaïs Ninin House of Incestissä ja Hélène Cixous'n Dedans'issa

The study approaches two modern novels using the conceptual frame of Lacanian psychoanalysis, especially the Lacanian notion of subject. The novels can be described as subversive “Bildungsromans” (development novels) highly influenced by psychoanalytic thought. Anaïs Nin’s (1903—1977) “poetic novel” House of Incest (1936) is a story of sexual and artistic awakening while Hélène Cixous’s (b. 1937) first novel Dedans (1969) depicts the growth of a little girl whose father dies. Both are first novels and first person narratives. Concentrating in the narrator’s internal life the novels writings break with the realistic conventions of narrative, bringing forth the themes of anguish, alienation from the world and escape into the prison like realm of the self. The study follows roughly the Lacanian process of becoming a subject. Each chapter opens up with a quick introduction to the Lacanian concepts used in the following part that analyses the novels. The study can thus also be used as a brief introduction to Lacanian theory in finnish. The psychoanalytic narrative/story of the birth of the subject and the novels stories can be seen as mirroring each other. The method of the study is thus based on a dialogue between the theoretical concepts and the analyses. Novels are being approached as texts that break with the Cartesian notion of an autonomous subject making room for a dialectics of self and other, for a movement in which the “I” builds an identity mirroring itself with others. While both of the novels recount the birth of a character called I, they also have a first person narrator apart from the character “I”. Having constituted the self’s identity, the narrator finds from inside of the self also an other or “you” – this discovery is the final clue to the coffin of the autonomous self. From the Lacanian perspective man’s great Other is the order of language, Symbolic, which constitutes the individual, the speaking subject. Using this perspective the novels are interpreted as describing the process of becoming a subject of the Symbolic; subjected to Symbolic order. This “birth process” happens in particular in the Imaginary register, where the self’s identity is built. In the Imaginary or Mirror phase the “I” mirrors himself with different others (e.g. with his mirror image and the family members, the surrounding others) learning to see his body and his selfhood both as familiar and strange, other. In the Imaginary phase the novels’ characters are also trying to deal with the opposite realm of the Symcolic, the Real. The Lacanian Real is not the reality “before words” but a reality left over from the Symbolic, aside of it but constituted by the Symbolic, to be deducted only from within it. In the novels the Real is experienced as a womblike state where the self is immersed in the other’s body. The process of coming a subject of the Symbolic is depicted also as a process of renouncing the “dream of the womb”, which, if realized, could only mean the non-existence of the subject, i.e. death. The study concentrates on analysing the novels’ writing, where meanings are constantly changing: “I” becomes you, the father becomes a mother, inside becomes outside. This technique enables also the deconstruction of certain opposing notions in the novels. The Lacanian point of view exposes language as a constantly moving universe where the subject has no more stability than the momentary meanings language creates. The self’s identity depicted in the novels is a Lacanian fixed identity, whose growth is necessary but opposes the flux imminent to the Symbolic. The anguish experienced in the novels, in the “house of incest” or “inside”, is due to clinging on the unchanging “I”. However, the writing of the novels shows how the meaning of the “I” changes constantly and the fixity thus becomes movement. This way House of Incest and Dedans, despite their pessimistic stories, manage to create an image of a new, moving subject.

Boxicity of Halin graphs

A k-dimensional box is the Cartesian product R-1 x R-2 x ... x R-k where each R-i is a closed interval on the real line. The boxicity of a graph G, denoted as box(G) is the minimum integer k such that G is the intersection graph of a collection of k-dimensional boxes. Halin graphs are the graphs formed by taking a tree with no degree 2 vertex and then connecting its leaves to form a cycle in such a way that the graph has a planar embedding. We prove that if G is a Halin graph that is not isomorphic to K-4, then box(G) = 2. In fact, we prove the stronger result that if G is a planar graph formed by connecting the leaves of any tree in a simple cycle, then box(G) = 2 unless G is isomorphic to K4 (in which case its boxicity is 1).

Feature integration in human vision

The earliest stages of human cortical visual processing can be conceived as extraction of local stimulus features. However, more complex visual functions, such as object recognition, require integration of multiple features. Recently, neural processes underlying feature integration in the visual system have been under intensive study. A specialized mid-level stage preceding the object recognition stage has been proposed to account for the processing of contours, surfaces and shapes as well as configuration. This thesis consists of four experimental, psychophysical studies on human visual feature integration. In two studies, classification image a recently developed psychophysical reverse correlation method was used. In this method visual noise is added to near-threshold stimuli. By investigating the relationship between random features in the noise and observer s perceptual decision in each trial, it is possible to estimate what features of the stimuli are critical for the task. The method allows visualizing the critical features that are used in a psychophysical task directly as a spatial correlation map, yielding an effective "behavioral receptive field". Visual context is known to modulate the perception of stimulus features. Some of these interactions are quite complex, and it is not known whether they reflect early or late stages of perceptual processing. The first study investigated the mechanisms of collinear facilitation, where nearby collinear Gabor flankers increase the detectability of a central Gabor. The behavioral receptive field of the mechanism mediating the detection of the central Gabor stimulus was measured by the classification image method. The results show that collinear flankers increase the extent of the behavioral receptive field for the central Gabor, in the direction of the flankers. The increased sensitivity at the ends of the receptive field suggests a low-level explanation for the facilitation. The second study investigated how visual features are integrated into percepts of surface brightness. A novel variant of the classification image method with brightness matching task was used. Many theories assume that perceived brightness is based on the analysis of luminance border features. Here, for the first time this assumption was directly tested. The classification images show that the perceived brightness of both an illusory Craik-O Brien-Cornsweet stimulus and a real uniform step stimulus depends solely on the border. Moreover, the spatial tuning of the features remains almost constant when the stimulus size is changed, suggesting that brightness perception is based on the output of a single spatial frequency channel. The third and fourth studies investigated global form integration in random-dot Glass patterns. In these patterns, a global form can be immediately perceived, if even a small proportion of random dots are paired to dipoles according to a geometrical rule. In the third study the discrimination of orientation structure in highly coherent concentric and Cartesian (straight) Glass patterns was measured. The results showed that the global form was more efficiently discriminated in concentric patterns. The fourth study investigated how form detectability depends on the global regularity of the Glass pattern. The local structure was either Cartesian or curved. It was shown that randomizing the local orientation deteriorated the performance only with the curved pattern. The results give support for the idea that curved and Cartesian patterns are processed in at least partially separate neural systems.

An investigation of bond formation in the weakly bound first excited 1Σ and lowest 3Σ states of HeH+

The role of the electronic kinetic energy and its Cartesian components is examined during the formation of the first excited 1�£ and the lowest 3�£ states of HeH+ employing wavefunctions of multi-configuration type with basis orbitals in elliptic coordinates. Results show that the bond formation in these states is preceded primarily by a charge transfer from H to He+ rather than by polarisation of the H-orbital by He+

Tannakian Formalism Applied to the Category of Mixed Hodge Structures

Many problems in analysis have been solved using the theory of Hodge structures. P. Deligne started to treat these structures in a categorical way. Following him, we introduce the categories of mixed real and complex Hodge structures. Category of mixed Hodge structures over the field of real or complex numbers is a rigid abelian tensor category, and in fact, a neutral Tannakian category. Therefore it is equivalent to the category of representations of an affine group scheme. The direct sums of pure Hodge structures of different weights over real or complex numbers can be realized as a representation of the torus group, whose complex points is the Cartesian product of two punctured complex planes. Mixed Hodge structures turn out to consist of information of a direct sum of pure Hodge structures of different weights and a nilpotent automorphism. Therefore mixed Hodge structures correspond to the representations of certain semidirect product of a nilpotent group and the torus group acting on it.

Open source computer-vision based guidance system for UAVs on-board decision making

The use of UAVs for remote sensing tasks; e.g. agriculture, search and rescue is increasing. The ability for UAVs to autonomously find a target and perform on-board decision making, such as descending to a new altitude or landing next to a target is a desired capability. Computer-vision functionality allows the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) to follow a designated flight plan, detect an object of interest, and change its planned path. In this paper we describe a low cost and an open source system where all image processing is achieved on-board the UAV using a Raspberry Pi 2 microprocessor interfaced with a camera. The Raspberry Pi and the autopilot are physically connected through serial and communicate via MAVProxy. The Raspberry Pi continuously monitors the flight path in real time through USB camera module. The algorithm checks whether the target is captured or not. If the target is detected, the position of the object in frame is represented in Cartesian coordinates and converted into estimate GPS coordinates. In parallel, the autopilot receives the target location approximate GPS and makes a decision to guide the UAV to a new location. This system also has potential uses in the field of Precision Agriculture, plant pest detection and disease outbreaks which cause detrimental financial damage to crop yields if not detected early on. Results show the algorithm is accurate to detect 99% of object of interest and the UAV is capable of navigation and doing on-board decision making.

A real-time algorithm for simulation of flexible objects and hyper-redundant manipulators

Flexible objects such as a rope or snake move in a way such that their axial length remains almost constant. To simulate the motion of such an object, one strategy is to discretize the object into large number of small rigid links connected by joints. However, the resulting discretised system is highly redundant and the joint rotations for a desired Cartesian motion of any point on the object cannot be solved uniquely. In this paper, we revisit an algorithm, based on the classical tractrix curve, to resolve the redundancy in such hyper-redundant systems. For a desired motion of the `head' of a link, the `tail' is moved along a tractrix, and recursively all links of the discretised objects are moved along different tractrix curves. The algorithm is illustrated by simulations of a moving snake, tying of knots with a rope and a solution of the inverse kinematics of a planar hyper-redundant manipulator. The simulations show that the tractrix based algorithm leads to a more `natural' motion since the motion is distributed uniformly along the entire object with the displacements diminishing from the `head' to the `tail'.