Slashdot Mirror

I don't know where you are, but here in Canada, all that stands in the way of the three day work week is a lack of vision. You can find details at: http://www.ProjectsDoneRight.com/pdr/pdrPapersCana dianEconomy1.asp

• Under-Deliver There are two basic reasons why projects under-deliver:
  
  • Limited Objective: "We anticipate growing at 10% per year if you can eliminate the paperwork bottlenecks that are choking our business."
    
  • Predetermined Solution: "We want you to develop a computerized dispatching system for us."
  
  
  
• Fail Completely There are three basic reasons why projects fail completely:
  
  • Lack of Vision: "But we've always done it this way, and so has everyone else."
    
  • Lack of Commitment: "We're just too busy to get this done."
    
  • Lack of Resources: "I know you want to win a $30 million contract for the company, but we're too busy to help."

• Under-Deliver There are two basic reasons why projects under-deliver:
  
  • Limited Objective: "We anticipate growing at 10% per year if you can eliminate the paperwork bottlenecks that are choking our business."
    
  • Predetermined Solution: "We want you to develop a computerized dispatching system for us."
  
  
  
• Fail Completely There are three basic reasons why projects fail completely:
  
  • Lack of Vision: "But we've always done it this way, and so has everyone else."
    
  • Lack of Commitment: "We're just too busy to get this done."
    
  • Lack of Resources: "I know you want to win a $30 million contract for the company, but we're too busy to help."

By the end of the 21st century, creativity -- the creation of intellectual property -- will be the only currently known role that will still be the domain of us humans. And the control of that creativity is what is being fought for now.

That's the power struggle going on now. It's just started. One more thing. By the end of the 21st century, molecular genetics will have progressed to the point where most people will be able to live almost forever. Imagine living forever in a world where production and services basically cost nothing. The only thing of value will be control of the intellectual property behind it all.

Imagine a world where material items sell for a dollar each and services are provided for ten cents an hour. It could be paradise if you have the money to pay for what you want. But if you don't, how do you compete against such prices?

The challenge as we approach the 22nd century will be to rethink the issues of access. How will we reward innovation while making it possible for most people to survive and live reasonably good lives? Because, if most people cannot pay for those goods and services, there will be a revolution. If that revolution succeeds, those who were on top will be gone. If the revolution fails, the whole economic system will collapse from lack of customers.

Hang onto your hat. It's going to be a wild ride."

From: www.ProjectsDoneRight.com/pdr/pdrPapersIP.asp

The 20th century was incredible. We acquired the ability to produce food and goods to satisfy the needs of everyone on earth, though we did not make them available to everyone.

We have had two major power struggles during the 20th century. At the beginning, production was 'difficult', so those who could produce were able to 'call the shots'. WW II was a war of production and it was wonn by the side that was able to produce the most bombs and bullets.

Since then, productivity has continued to improve. Production is no longer the 'hard part'. The challenge during the past few decades has been to convince people to buy. Hence marketing has become king. Between 3rd world labor and automation, production costs have fallen dramatically. For most products, the major costs are Marketing & Distribution and R&D.

But the smart folks have recognized that the 21st century will be even more unsettling than the 20th century. Computer controlled extraction of natural resources and production (including nanotechnology) can drive manufacturing costs to almost zero. (Go read 'A for Anything' , by Damon Knight) With the Internet, we will be able to distribute the knowledge of how to produce. This will eliminate most of the challenges associated with distribution (since it will be possible to do most production locally, so there will be little money to be made there either, unless artificial controls and impediments are implemented.

This is why there's such a fight for intellectual property rights. Only by controlling the knowledge of how and what to produce can power be maintained by those who value it. By the middle of the 21st century, the major cost of any material item will be the 'intellectual property' charge.

With production automated, almost everyone who is employed will be working in service jobs by 2050. And then it gets more interesting.

As AI research progresses, we will be able to build robots capable of doing service jobs. The health care crisis will be 'solved' during the second half of the 21st century. Robots will replace, not only orderlies and nurses, but physicians and surgeons, too. The cost of producing these robots will be minimal. The valuable commodity will be the knowledge of how to program them to do what you want them to do.

By the end of the 21st century, creativity -- the creation of intellectual property -- will be the only currently known role that will still be the domain of us humans. And the control of that creativity is what is being fought for now.

That's the power struggle going on now. It's just started.

One more thing. By the end of the 21st century, molecular genetics will have progressed to the point where most people will be able to live almost forever. Imagine living forever in a world where production and services basically cost nothing. The only thing of value will be control of the intellectual property behind it all. Imagine a world where material items sell for a dollar each and services are provided for ten cents an hour. It could be paradise if you have the money to pay for what you want. But if you don't, how do you compete against such prices?

The challenge as we approach the 22nd century will be to rethink the issues of access. How will we reward innovation while making it possible for most people to survive and live reasonably good lives?

Because, if most people cannot pay for those goods and services, there will be a revolution. If that revolution succeeds, those who were on top will be gone. If the revolution fails, the whole economic system will collapse from lack of customers.

Hang onto your hat. It's going to be a wild ride.

From: http://www.ProjectsDoneRight.com/pdr/pdrPapersIP.a sp

But other than that, the concept of a bunch of people trying to 'reveal the elephant' through individual efforts is probably why so many projects fail or produce sub-optimal results.

Projects vary in many ways. The most significant is often Uncertainty. Towards one end of the continuum we have the Recipe Book project:- "We've done something very similar before - we have the recipe and we know how to follow it". Towards the other end, we have the Wilderness Exploration project:- "We have an idea of where we want to end up, but we really don't know how we will get there, how long the journey will take, nor what adventures may arise on the way."

There are a host of skills and techniques that can help in such situations. One of the most applicable general methodologies that I've learned is the Canadain Method. It was first introduced (so far as I know) to capture Vimy Ridge in World War One. The capture took one day and cost the Canadians 3,500 fatalities and 7,000 wounded. British and French efforts had previously cost over 200,000 lives and produced no significant results during two years.

Twenty plus years of leading projects has given me considerable insight into "The Art and Science of Making the Future Happen."

If you want to read the first chapter of the distillation of this experience, you can find it at: http://www.ProjectsDoneRight.com/pdr/pdrBook.asp

While a few were rich, most people seldom even had enough to eat. The 20th century was incredible. We acquired the ability to produce food and goods to satisfy the needs of everyone on earth, though we did not make them available to everyone.

We have had two major power struggles during the 20th century. At the beginning, production was 'difficult', so those who could produce were able to 'call the shots'. WW II was a war of production and it was won by the side that was able to produce the most bombs and bullets.

Since then, productivity has continued to improve. Production is no longer the 'hard part'. The challenge during the past few decades has been to convince people to buy. Hence marketing has become king. Between 3rd world labor and automation, production costs have fallen dramatically. For most products, the major costs are Marketing & Distribution and R&D.

But the smart folks have recognized that the 21st century will be even more unsettling than the 20th century. Computer controlled extraction of natural resources and production (including nanotechnology) can drive manufacturing costs to almost zero. (Go read 'A for Anything' , by Damon Knight) With the Internet, we will be able to distribute the knowledge of how to produce. This will eliminate most of the challenges associated with distribution (since it will be possible to do most production locally) so there will be little money to be made there either, unless artificial controls and impediments are implemented.

This is why there's such a fight for intellectual property rights. Only by controlling the knowledge of how and what to produce can power be maintained by those who value it. By the middle of the 21st century, the major cost of any material item will be the 'intellectual property' charge.

With production automated, almost everyone who is employed will be working in service jobs by 2050. And then it gets more interesting.

As AI research progresses, we will be able to build robots capable of doing service jobs. The health care crisis will be 'solved' during the second half of the 21st century. Robots will replace, not only orderlies and nurses, but physicians and surgeons, too. The cost of producing these robots will be minimal. The valuable commodity will be the knowledge of how to program them to do what you want them to do.

By the end of the 21st century, creativity -- the creation of intellectual property -- will be the only currently known role that will still be the domain of us humans. And the control of that creativity is what is being fought for now.

That's the power struggle going on now. It's just started.

One more thing. By the end of the 21st century, molecular genetics will have progressed to the point where most people will be able to live almost forever. Imagine living forever in a world where production and services basically cost nothing. The only thing of value will be control of the intellectual property behind it all. Imagine a world where material items sell for a dollar each and services are provided for ten cents an hour. It could be paradise if you have the money to pay for what you want. But if you don't, how do you compete against such prices?

The challenge as we approach the 22nd century will be to rethink the issues of access. How will we reward innovation while making it possible for most people to survive and live reasonably good lives?

Because, if most people cannot pay for those goods and services, there will be a revolution. If that revolution succeeds, those who were on top will be gone. If the revolution fails, the whole economic system will collapse from lack of customers.

Hang onto your hat. It's going to be a wild ride.

If you can't find it, you can at least follow this link to get the idea.

This is the reason why there's been, and will continue to be, such a fight over Intellectual Property Rights.

IP is not really about music. The big boys and girls are just letting the music folks 'carry the can' for now.

Thirty years of applications design, development and implementation experience have taught me to always do it right.

The challenge is to quickly figure out what is right for the particular circumstances. If the task is a one-time data conversion, where you can inspect the data before and after, a short perl script may be all you need. If you are developing the 'coolant overheat' routine for a nuclear power station, make sure every possible condition is identified, and handled in a failsafe manner, before design is even begun. And test, test, test.

It helps to 'know your stuff'. I once had to appeal a management decision because it was wrong. His boss disagreed with me. So I took it up another level. He disagreed, too. So I put my job on the line and went a level higher still. I won that one. I was designing and building an ISAM engine. It had to work, first time and every time, without tuning.

Have I broken every rule in the book? Certainly, when it was appropriate. EDI in 3 Weeks - No data, no specs, no requirements, no customer - No Problem! I do it by understanding the rules behind the rules. But it's a risk. It helps to be lucky.

Morris Schneiderman
www.ProjectsDoneRight.com

Thirty years of applications design, development and implementation experience have taught me to always do it right.

The challenge is to quickly figure out what is right for the particular circumstances. If the task is a one-time data conversion, where you can inspect the data before and after, a short perl script may be all you need. If you are developing the 'coolant overheat' routine for a nuclear power station, make sure every possible condition is identified, and handled in a failsafe manner, before design is even begun. And test, test, test.

It helps to 'know your stuff'. I once had to appeal a management decision because it was wrong. His boss disagreed with me. So I took it up another level. He disagreed, too. So I put my job on the line and went a level higher still. I won that one. I was designing and building an ISAM engine. It had to work, first time and every time, without tuning.

Have I broken every rule in the book? Certainly, when it was appropriate. EDI in 3 Weeks - No data, no specs, no requirements, no customer - No Problem! I do it by understanding the rules behind the rules. But it's a risk. It helps to be lucky.

Morris Schneiderman
www.ProjectsDoneRight.com

"I deal with this situtation everyday as an electrical engineer in the aerospace industry. We ask for something and we get ignored because the amount we are willing to spend or the quantity we want is not worth their effort."

Depending upon what you need, you might consider looking to get it in Canada. Canada is a much smaller market (only 10% as large as the USA) so Canadian manufacturers have had to become very good at small production runs and custom orders.

The North American Free Trade Agreement makes it relatively painless to get things across the border and $1.00 US gets you about $1.50 Canadian, so you typically get more for your money, too.

If you can't find what you want on your own, check us out at www.ProjectsDoneRight.com

We have contacts that may be able to help.

Morris