A system provides quantification and mapping of cultural characteristics. An analytic engine collects and organizes cultural attribute information by binary score and by cultural tendency. A cultural score engine coupled to the analytic engine receives cultural attribute information by category and scores the cultural attribute data for each cultural attribute to create scored data. A map engine receives the scored data and maps the cultural attribute data to a graphic output. An assessment engine quantifies areas, organization priorities, or cultural tendencies associated with each graphic output. A comparison engine compares a plurality of graphic outputs in a single comparison graphic output of cultural tendencies.
Please help me write a proper abstract based on the patent claims. CLAIM: 1. A system that provides quantification and mapping of cultural characteristics comprising: an analytic engine configured to collect and organize cultural attribute information by binary score and by cultural tendency; a cultural score engine coupled to the analytic engine that receives cultural attribute information by category and scores the cultural attribute data for each cultural attribute to create scored data; a map engine that receives the scored data and maps the cultural attribute data to a graphic output; an assessment engine that quantifies areas, organization priorities, or cultural tendencies associated with each graphic output; and a comparison engine that compares a plurality of graphic outputs in a single comparison graphic output of cultural tendencies. 2. The system of claim 1, wherein the analytic engine generates one or more culture describing attributes from the cultural attribute information and assigns data scores to the cultural attribute information. 3. The system of claim 1, wherein the analytic engine assigns data by category, with the assignment of data by category selected by at least one of, an attribute, by binary and by cultural tendencies. 4. The system of claim 1, wherein the graphic output is a mapped output. 5. The system of claim 1, wherein the comparison engine calculates a quantifiable allocation to compare the assessed cultural attributes to other cultures. 6. The system of claim 1, wherein each attribute includes a selection of sub-attributes selected from at least one of, diversity, social structure, environmental wellness, human wellness, management, financial, decision method and technology adeptness. 7. The system of claim 1, wherein for each attribute being scored using a binary score, each attribute is given a corresponding binary ruler with opposing tendencies for the attribute. 8. The system of claim 1, wherein for the binary score, each attribute is scored on a scale. 9. The system of claim 8, wherein, the scale can be set from −10 to 10. 10. The system of claim 8, wherein, the scale can be set from 0 to 20. 11. The system of claim 8, wherein, the scale can be set from −5 to 20. 12. The system of claim 8, where the scale is able to measure decimal increments. 13. The system of claim 8, wherein, a score on a scale of −10 to 10 can be 7.2. 14. The system of claim 1, wherein cultural tendencies include at least one of: conservative, exploratory, informed, intuitive. 15. The system of claim 1, wherein scoring data by cultural tendency is achieved with a linear measure for each cultural attribute category. 16. The system of claim 15, wherein the linear measure is a binary ruler that scores cultural attributes in relationship to two sub-attributes. 17. The system of claim 1, wherein the map engine creates a graphic output. 17. The system of claim 17, wherein the graphic output is mapped on a Cartesian grid. 18. The system of claim 17, wherein the map engine uses a grid location algorithm to map the graphic output. 19. The system of claim 17, wherein the map engine creates a cultural tendency map with a quadrant assigned for each cultural tendency. 20. The system of claim 19, wherein the map engine divides each of the quadrants into an incremental grid with X and Y reference points. 21. The system of claim 19, wherein the map engine divides an incremental grid into decimal values between reference points. 22. The system of claim 19, wherein the map engine represents binary scores of cultural attributes using a radial measure. 23. The system of claim 22, wherein the radial measure with a measurable radius (r) is mapped to a graphic output. 24. The system of claim 23, wherein the map engine sets a mid-point of the binary scale at a 0 point, where (r=0). 25. The system of claim 24, wherein values farther from the mid-point represent a closer match to the cultural tendency in a quadrant than values closer to the mid-point. 26. The system of claim 23, wherein a center point of a circle is established at an intersection of X and Y axes, where X and Y are both equal to 0. 27. The system of claim 23, where the grid is defined by the same scale as the binary ruler. 28. The system of claim 27, wherein the scale is defined according to a range: x=0, y=10; x=0, y=−10; x=−10, y=0; and x=10, y=0. 29. The system of claim 23, wherein the radius (r) is any integer or decimal value on the binary scale. 30. The system of claim 27, wherein the radius (r) value is from 0 and 10 or 0 and −10. 31. The system of claim 1, wherein the map engine transposes each cultural attribute binary score to the graphic output. 32. The system of claim 31, wherein the binary score is mapped to the graphic output according to a graphic location algorithm. 33. The system of claim 32, wherein the graphic location algorithm relates a rotational position given as a number of degrees to a 360 degree reference. 34. The system of claim 33, wherein the rotational position given as a number of degrees in reference to 360 degrees is described in terms of an angle θ which is between 0 and 360 degrees, and includes 0 and 360 degrees. 35. The system of claim 34, wherein the angle θ depends on a number of cultural attributes being mapped to the graphic output. 36. The system of claim 35, wherein for whole number N of cultural attributes being mapped to the graphic output, θ is defined as θ=360/2N. 37. The system of claim 35, wherein the angle θ is equal for each cultural attribute being mapped or is weighted according to attribute priority. 38. The system of claim 34, wherein the rotational position is dependent on how exclusively the cultural attribute being mapped represents the cultural tendency in a quadrant. 39. The system of claim 38, Wherein cultural attributes that are indicative of a single cultural tendency are placed at a rotational position in the quadrant that does not border or share an X or Y axis. 40. The system of claim 38, wherein cultural attributes that are indicative of at least one of, multiple cultural tendencies, shared and non-exclusive, are placed at a rotational position in the quadrant bordering or sharing an X or Y axis. 41. The system of claim 1, wherein the assessment engine performs a radial graphical location algorithm to determine a location of binary scores on the graphical output. 42. The system of claim 1, wherein the assessment engine assigns cultural attribute data calculated values of radius and rotational position. 43. The system of claim 42, wherein calculated values of radius and rotational position are mapped as plotted points. 44. The system of claim 42, wherein radial section allocations derived via a radial grid location algorithm designated by an angle θ are equal or weighted according to organization priorities. 45. The system of claim 42, wherein the assessment engine assigns calculated values of radius and rotational position for each cultural attribute data score being mapped. 46. The system of claim 42, wherein the assessment engine performs a calculation of priority for cultural attribute data. 47. The system of claim 46, wherein the assessment engine performs the calculation of cultural priority among cultural attribute data using a quantitative valuation algorithm. 48. The system of claim 46, wherein the calculation of cultural priority affects both the radius (r) and the rotational position measures. 49. The system of claim 48, wherein the assessment engine creates radial sections from the plotted points to generate a cultural tendencies graphic output. 50. The system of claim 49, wherein allocation areas are calculated. 51. The system of claim 50, wherein for a given radius (r) and angle θ the area associated with the corresponding cultural attribute being mapped is expressed as area A=½r2 sin θ/2 cos θ/2 if the cultural attributes are being mapped as wedge shapes. 52. The system of claim 49, wherein a quantification of area by quadrant is calculated to assign a value to the cultural tendency. 53. The system of claim 49, further comprising: calculating a measure of area to assign a value to a priority for a cultural tendency. 54. The system of claim 53, further comprising: determining a measure of area to assign relative values to organization priorities. 55. The system of claim 1, wherein the comparison engine performs a comparison of one culture to another culture. 56. The system of claim 55, wherein the comparison engine identifies other cultures for comparison (CB) for comparison to a reference culture (CA). 57. The system of claim 56, wherein the analytic engine quantifies a data quality score for CA and CB data. 58. The system of claim 57, wherein the comparison engine quantifies a difference of a total cultural attribute data score for CA and CB. 59. The system of claim 58, wherein the quantified difference is expressed as at least one of, a coefficient, a magnitude difference, and a percentage. 60. The system of claim 57, wherein the comparison engine plots cultural tendencies of CA and CB as a graphic output. 61. The system of claim 1, wherein the comparison engine performs a comparison to a comparison variable. 62. The system of claim 61, wherein the comparison engine identifies a cultural comparison variable (CV). 63. The system of claim 62, wherein the comparison variable CV relates to different points in time, that include at least one of: (a) a previous time, (where −t=an interval before a current date), (b) a current time (where t=a collection date), (c) a future date (where +t=an interval after the current date). 64. The system of claim 62, wherein the comparison variable CV relates to an alternate schedule, where an interval to achieve an outcome is increased (+ti) or decreased (−ti). 65. The system of claim 62, wherein the comparison variable CV relates to an outcome that is a quantity associated with a measurable result or outcome state, and the outcome is an increase (+qty) or decrease (−qty). 66. The system of claim 62, wherein the comparison variable CV relates to a financial state, which is at least one of, (a) a value associated with an amount of financial increase (−$) or decreased (−$), (b) a total cost of ownership ($tco), (c) cost avoidance ($ca) or (d) a revenue impact ($ri). 67. The system of claim 61, wherein the comparison engine performs a repeat cultural attribute data collection for another variable. 68. The system of claim 1, wherein the comparison engine identifies a reference culture for evaluation (CR). 69. The system of claim 68, wherein the reference culture CR is compared to a reference culture CA under a modification scenario, where CA is modified by a selected variable CV, represented by a culture CAV. 70. The system of claim 69, wherein if the cultural attribute information collection protocol is different for any of CAV or CR the data qualification engine calculates a modified data quality coefficient to represent a change in protocol. 71. The system of claim 69, further comprising: plotting cultural tendencies of CR and CAV as a graphic output. 72. The system of claim 71, further comprising: plotting organization priorities of CR and CAV on a radial grid map. 73. The system of claim 72, further comprising: repeating the graphic output process for each cultural variable included in CR and CAV. 74. The system of claim 1, wherein for any cultural variables compared a measurable difference is used for comparison. 75. The system of claim 74, wherein the other cultural variables is two or more of: CA, CB, CR, CV, or CAV. 76. The system of claim 75, further comprising: calculating a difference for each of for each of any CA, CB, CR, CV, or CAV being compared as change (delta) in area in each of a cultural tendency quadrant. 77. The system of claim 75, further comprising: calculating a difference for each CA, CB, CR, CV, or CAV being compared as a quantitative change in area in each of a cultural tendency quadrant. 78. The system of claim 75, further comprising: calculating a difference for each of CA, CB, CR, CV, or CAV as a quantitative change area to assign relative values to a cultural tendency. 79. The system of claim 75, further comprising: calculating a difference for CA, CB, CR, CV, or CAV as a quantitative change in a radius (r) to assign a value to a priority to a cultural tendency. 80. The system of claim 75, further comprising: calculating a difference for CA, CB, CR, or CV as a quantitative change in area to assign relative values to organization priorities.