Well I give credit for pull disparate sources! But perhaps these applications of these theories are a bit of a stretch. Riece's model is for corporate learning, not individual learning. when building a new product you really are in an OODA loop competition with your peers. In that sense I see the analogy. But that is for a CORPORATION learning startup lessons about a new product that no one knows the answer to. In the case of human learning, your choice of what to learn next or do next should not be just from yourself. So it seems feedback from self idea doesn't match so well. Specifically I am not convince that the speed a person that can try out a thing, learn from it, and try again should be maximized. It is not a direct competition with another, where you are learning ABOUT the other as you are doing in an OODA loop. Speed for an OODA loop is so critical because you can change your self, and this invalidates the learning of the other if you are faster. Hence in an ooda loop speed trumps most everything else. Not so in human learning. Quality really matter as much or more than speed. (I think the compound interest mapping of variables is stretch too, but will stop my response here.) cheers --dan