Veritology-Based Business Feasibility Methodological Design: A Conceptual Framework for Information Distortion Reduction in Entrepreneurship Planning

Authors

  • Christ Windreis STMIK Dharmapala Riau

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.58812/wsis.v4i10.3183

Keywords:

Business Feasibility, Veritology, Mechanical Epistemology, Material-Anchored Deviation Index (MADI), Ontological Veto

Abstract

The high failure rate of new ventures is frequently rooted in upstream planning information distortion driven by the dominance of optimism bias and strategic misrepresentation. This article aims to formulate a new methodological design in entrepreneurial feasibility analysis by positioning Veritology as an independent theoretical backbone. Utilizing a Mechanical Epistemology approach derived from the Teleological Algorithm of Veritology, the feasibility assessment is shifted from linguistic-narrative formalities toward the identification of structural anomalies within planning drafts based on material capacity constraints. The designed Veritology-Based Business Feasibility Evaluation Method (V-BFEM) extracts feasibility value through three core instruments: the separation of Organic Data (ℸ_o) from Constructed Data (∁_c), the forensic calibration of the Material-Anchored Deviation Index (MADI) utilizing a dynamic sectorial dispersal window, and the continuous exponential decay execution of the Ontological Veto Operator (V_∘). By embedding physical capacity gap scores directly as a conditional multiplier within the evaluation loop, this streamlined design prevents the mathematical error of structural double-counting while offering a materially anchored feasibility evaluation framework that remains subject to future empirical calibration, inter-rater reliability testing, and predictive validation.

References

[1] C. Windreis, “Why Do Entrepreneurs Quit the Business? A Study of Disengagement and its Implications,” West Sci. Bus. Manag., vol. 3, no. 01, pp. 91–96, 2025.

[2] D. Kahneman and A. Tversky, “Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk,” Econometrica, vol. 47, no. 2, pp. 263–291, 1979.

[3] B. Flyvbjerg, “Topos of strategic misrepresentation: Reasons for bias in planning,” Behav. Brain Sci., vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 456–457, 2008.

[4] S. Ghoshal, “Bad management theories are destroying good management practices,” Acad. Manag. Learn. Educ., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 75–91, 2005.

[5] T. Lawson, The nature of social reality: Issues in social ontology. Routledge, 2015.

[6] R. A. P. Hasiholan-Sidauruk, R. S. Hasiholan-Sidauruk, E. Hasiholan-Sidauruk, A. Hasiholan-Sidauruk, and S. Hasiholan-Sidauruk, “Teleological Algorithm of Veritology: Philosophy of Veritas as Audit and Forensic Teleology. A Study on the Ontology of Science,” Hasiholan Science Explorer: Veritas Research Project, 2026. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.19735348.

[7] R. A. P. Hasiholan-Sidauruk, R. S. Hasiholan-Sidauruk, and A. Hasiholan-Sidauruk, “Nandus nebulosus (Gray, 1835): nomen phantasma in zoology, a warning on the significance of historical investigations in the validation of older taxonomic nomenclature,” Veritas Research Project - Hasiholan Science Explorer, 2026. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.19686859.

[8] C. E. Shannon, “A mathematical theory of communication,” Bell Syst. Tech. J., vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 379–423, 1948.

[9] R. Landauer, “Irreversibility and heat generation in the computing process,” IBM J. Res. Dev., vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 183–191, 1961.

Downloads

Published

2026-10-28

How to Cite

Veritology-Based Business Feasibility Methodological Design: A Conceptual Framework for Information Distortion Reduction in Entrepreneurship Planning (C. Windreis, Trans.). (2026). West Science Interdisciplinary Studies, 4(10), 1476-1484. https://doi.org/10.58812/wsis.v4i10.3183