The purpose of Tetworld is to demonstrate an integrated problem analysis and solution system. Bucky Fuller coined the phrase design science to describe an integrated approach to problem solving and design of the future. Tetworld is one technique from the field of design science.

The structure of Tetworld is tetrahedral. A tetrahedron is the simplest 3 dimensional object. Each vertex or joint of the tetrahedron is joined to the other three, illustrating that each part of the problem or opportunity is connected to every other part.

Since the tetrahedron is 3 dimensional it divides the universe into an outside and an inside.

Each node or vertex of Tetworld gives one aspect of an integrated approach to the development of peace. To use the Tetworld structure we first pick a problem/opportunity from the real world. We then proceed from node to node examining the situation. At each node we document the current situation from the perspective of that node. As we document the current situation we show the connections between the node we are visiting and the other nodes. In this fashion we create a systemic model of the current situation.

Since each problem or opportunity is a system, we examine the situation with a systems model. Systems theory tells us that each system has

These system attributes give rise to system behavior. Two common behaviors are :

So as we move around the Tetworld nodes we use these properties of systems to characterize the problem or opportunity.

This approach can be modeled graphically by an octahedron as follows :

Once we have a model of the current situation we can imagine or envision alternatives to it. We can use tools like brainstorming, mind mapping or clustering to generate alternatives. Once they are generated we will need to evaluate and document them. Since each alternative is a new system, it will be embedded in the real world like the current problem or opportunity. Therefore we can use our model again but focus it on our future alternatives. Once we have gone around the elements of the octahedron documenting it will often be clear which alternative is the best.

In all cases we will use the mission criteria set forth by Fuller:

With our alternative future defined as a system we can move towards implementing it. We will have a model of the future alongside one of the present. The differences between these highlight the changes to be made. Since the modelers will not necessarily be in positions of power they will need to find strategies to move the system in the desired state. This process is what Bucky Fuller referred to as "turning the trimtab"

Trimtab : A large ship is steered by means of a rudder. The rudder is small compared to the ship, but can still be a large object and therefore difficult to turn. A trimtab can be placed on the rudder (sort of like a rudder for the rudder) allowing the larger rudder and thence the ship to be turned. The success of the modelers will depend on the pattern integrity of their model and their ability to find trimtabs.

The actual process we follow is linear in time. Each node has an e-mail list. On each e-mail list we maintain a structured timeline that moves through the steps above. For example, as we define the problem state we look at the situation from the perspective of Node A, then move on to see how each other node connects to the one we are visiting. Once this is done we move to defining the preferred state and the following steps. Once these steps are complete we move to Node B/C/D. Although the structure seems long, we gather speed as we move around.

At a higher level the game participants also post their interpretations of the process, and they jointly agree on modifications to the game.