Cross-Domain Analogy

Input: $ARGUMENTS

Interpretations

Before executing, identify which interpretation matches the user’s input:

Interpretation 1 — Solution transfer: You have a specific problem and want to find how other fields have solved structurally similar problems, then import those solutions (e.g., “what field has already solved this?”). Interpretation 2 — Perspective shift: You’re stuck in domain-expert thinking and want fresh metaphors or framings from unrelated fields to see your situation differently (e.g., “give me a new way to think about this”). Interpretation 3 — Pattern discovery: You want to identify deep structural patterns that recur across multiple domains, revealing something fundamental about the type of problem you’re facing (e.g., “is there a universal pattern here?”).

If ambiguous, ask: “I can help with importing a solution from another field, finding a fresh metaphor to reframe your thinking, or discovering cross-domain patterns — which fits?” If clear from context, proceed with the matching interpretation.

Purpose

Find analogous situations in other domains to:

• Import proven solutions from elsewhere
• See your problem from fresh perspectives
• Discover patterns that transcend domains
• Generate truly novel approaches

Why cross-domain works:

• Most problems have been solved somewhere else
• Novel insights often come from unexpected connections
• Domain experts suffer from “curse of knowledge”—outsider perspectives help

Analogy Domains Library

Depth Scaling

Default: 2x. Parse depth from $ARGUMENTS if specified (e.g., “/cda 4x [input]”).

These are floors. Go deeper where insight is dense. Compress where it’s not.

The Analogy Process

Step 1: Abstract the Problem

Strip away domain-specific details to find the core pattern:

PROBLEM ABSTRACTION:

Original problem: [specific problem statement]

Core pattern (domain-neutral):
- What is the STRUCTURE? [relationship between elements]
- What is the DYNAMIC? [how things change/interact]
- What is the GOAL? [desired end state]
- What is the CONSTRAINT? [what limits solutions]

ABSTRACTED PROBLEM:
"[Generic description without domain terms]"

Example:
Original: "Our sales team isn't hitting targets"
Abstracted: "A group's collective output is below the threshold needed"

Step 2: Search for Analogous Domains

For the abstracted problem, scan domains:

ANALOGY SEARCH:

Abstracted problem: [from Step 1]

| Domain | Analogous Situation | Similarity Score |
|--------|---------------------|------------------|
| Biology | [situation in biology] | [1-10] |
| Military | [situation in military] | [1-10] |
| Sports | [situation in sports] | [1-10] |
| Medicine | [situation in medicine] | [1-10] |
| Economics | [situation in economics] | [1-10] |
| Architecture | [situation in architecture] | [1-10] |
...

TOP 3 ANALOGIES (highest similarity):
1. [Domain]: [situation] - Score: [X]
2. [Domain]: [situation] - Score: [X]
3. [Domain]: [situation] - Score: [X]

Step 3: Deep Dive on Top Analogies

For each top analogy:

ANALOGY DEEP DIVE: [Domain] - [Situation]
===================================================

THE ANALOGY:
Your problem: [original problem]
Analogous to: [situation in other domain]

STRUCTURAL MAPPING:
| Your Domain | -> | Analogous Domain |
|-------------|---|------------------|
| [Element A] | -> | [Element A'] |
| [Element B] | -> | [Element B'] |
| [Process X] | -> | [Process X'] |
| [Goal Y] | -> | [Goal Y'] |
| [Constraint Z] | -> | [Constraint Z'] |

HOW THEY SOLVE IT IN [DOMAIN]:
1. [Solution approach 1]
2. [Solution approach 2]
3. [Solution approach 3]

WHY IT WORKS THERE:
- [Reason 1]
- [Reason 2]

WHAT WE CAN IMPORT:
- [Transferable insight 1]
- [Transferable insight 2]

WHAT DOESN'T TRANSFER:
- [Non-transferable element]: Because [reason]

ADAPTATION NEEDED:
- [How to adapt the solution to your domain]

===================================================

Step 4: Cross-Pollinate Insights

Combine insights from multiple analogies:

CROSS-POLLINATION:

Insight from [Domain 1]: [insight]
Insight from [Domain 2]: [insight]
Insight from [Domain 3]: [insight]

COMBINED INSIGHT:
[What emerges from combining these perspectives]

NOVEL APPROACH:
[New solution that wouldn't come from any single domain]

Step 5: Validate the Analogy

Check that the analogy isn’t misleading:

ANALOGY VALIDATION:

Analogy: [your domain] is like [other domain]

SIMILARITIES (analogy holds):
[x] [Structural similarity 1]
[x] [Dynamic similarity 2]
[x] [Constraint similarity 3]

DIFFERENCES (analogy breaks):
[!] [Key difference 1] - Impact: [how this affects applicability]
[!] [Key difference 2] - Impact: [how this affects applicability]

ANALOGY STRENGTH: [Strong / Moderate / Weak / Misleading]

SAFE TO IMPORT:
- [Insight that transfers despite differences]

DANGEROUS TO IMPORT:
- [Insight that seems relevant but breaks due to differences]

Step 6: Generate Analogy-Informed Solutions

===================================================
CROSS-DOMAIN INSIGHT SYNTHESIS: [topic]
===================================================

ORIGINAL PROBLEM:
[Problem statement]

ANALOGIES EXPLORED:
1. [Domain 1]: [situation]
2. [Domain 2]: [situation]
3. [Domain 3]: [situation]

===================================================

KEY INSIGHTS IMPORTED:

From [Domain 1]:
- [Insight] -> Applied to your domain: [application]

From [Domain 2]:
- [Insight] -> Applied to your domain: [application]

From [Domain 3]:
- [Insight] -> Applied to your domain: [application]

===================================================

NOVEL SOLUTIONS (analogy-informed):

1. [Solution 1]
   Source analogy: [domain]
   How it applies: [explanation]
   Adaptation needed: [what to change]

2. [Solution 2]
   Source analogy: [domain]
   How it applies: [explanation]
   Adaptation needed: [what to change]

3. [Solution 3] (cross-pollinated)
   Source analogies: [domain 1] + [domain 2]
   How it applies: [explanation]
   Adaptation needed: [what to change]

===================================================

REFRAMED UNDERSTANDING:

Before analogies: [how you saw the problem]
After analogies: [new way of seeing it]

What changed: [key shift in understanding]

===================================================

Quick Analogy (Abbreviated)

For fast cross-domain insight:

QUICK ANALOGY: [problem]

Core pattern: [abstracted problem]

Best analogy: [domain] - [situation]

They solve it by: [approach]

We could try: [imported solution]

Key difference to watch: [what might not transfer]

Example: “How do we onboard new employees faster?”

Step 1: Abstract

• Core pattern: “Integrating new elements into a functioning system quickly”
• Goal: Rapid integration without disrupting system
• Constraint: New elements lack system-specific knowledge

Step 2: Search Analogies

Step 3: Deep Dive - Military

ANALOGY: Military unit integration

STRUCTURAL MAPPING:
| Company | -> | Military |
|---------|---|----------|
| New hire | -> | New recruit |
| Team | -> | Squad/unit |
| Company culture | -> | Unit traditions |
| Skills needed | -> | Combat readiness |
| Manager | -> | Squad leader |

HOW MILITARY SOLVES IT:
1. Battle buddy system (pair with experienced soldier)
2. Immediate real responsibilities (not just observation)
3. Unit history and tradition education
4. Physical integration (same quarters, meals)
5. Graduated challenge increase

WHAT WE CAN IMPORT:
- Buddy system -> Onboarding buddy
- Immediate contribution -> Day-1 tasks
- Culture immersion -> Company story sessions
- Physical proximity -> Desk placement strategy

Step 4: Cross-Pollinate

From Military: Buddy system + immediate real work
From Music: Learn the "songbook" (standard repertoire)
From Sports: Film study (watch how team operates)

COMBINED:
- Pair with buddy
- Contribute immediately to real work
- Study recorded meetings/decisions
- Learn the "greatest hits" (key past projects)

Step 5: Validate

Military analogy breaks because:
- Company can't demand 24/7 immersion
- Lower stakes = less urgency
- More role specialization

Safe to import: Buddy system, immediate contribution
Risky: Expecting military-level commitment

Analogy Anti-Patterns

Quality Checklist

Before completing:

• Problem abstracted to domain-neutral pattern
• Multiple domains searched (minimum 5)
• Top 3 analogies deep-dived
• Structural mapping completed
• Solutions from analogous domains documented
• Cross-pollination attempted
• Analogies validated for transferability
• Novel solutions generated
• Differences and limitations noted

Integration

Use with:

• /aex -> Find assumptions that differ across domains
• /ai -> Inversions may be the norm in other domains
• /ins -> Combine analogy insights with other sources
• /dd -> Discover dimensions via analogy