I prefer "responsibility"; "ownership" is, IMO, misapplied here. (Though, arguably, one of the reasons people do not take responsibility is because they don't, in fact, have ownership -- but ownership is a material relationship, and responsibility is the relevant attitude.)
But I think in substance we generally agree.
We do, I think the difference is that my experience has been fixing projects starting from a technical complaint to an outside organization and helping those in an IT/Technology organization drive changes up thru their organization, often into the CEO space when needed. From your choice of wording, I suspect, your experience in this might start higher up the product chain.
Until you have staff, from the CEO down, that own problems, from the mess in the coffee room to server down time, you will have a "business house of cards" no matter how good the process. In fact, most of the time, fixing things involves re-writing and/or reconsidering process - usually starting with asking the question - "Do we really need that?"
You kind of contradict yourself there: if fixing things usually requires changing the process, then "how good the process" is obviously has fairly direct bearing on success. The key thing is that processes aren't good (or bad) in a vacuum, they are good or bad based on the effects they have in your organization, in acheiving your mission; the same nominal process that is good for a group of people when considered against one mission is going to be bad for the same group of people when considered against different goals, and the same process that is good for one group of people with a given mission will suck for another group of people with the same mission, because people matter.
I probably expressed that poorly. To put it another, hopefully more correct way - For organizations you can help (there are plenty that are unreceptive to this kind of help) you have to have to start with the culture. Identify those who have true involvement, are willing to risk take, have decision power... and get all of them committed before you can fix the process, which then finally lets you help fix the bugs/tech. Lather, rinse, repeat till organization functions.
In particularly ill organizations, there is no way to separate these items (or the combatant parties:-)) long enough to obtain a fix. You have to wait till the financial realities drive some common sense into the organization. Sadly, for many businesses, this is too late
I'm going to tackle some of the conceptual problems that are hinted at above, which is usually where the difficulties lie, usually in trying to use the wrong software and expecting to somehow "make everything better" if you just make it work "my way" - the true "Magical Thinking".
I tend to agree with your conclusions, "wipe the slate clean" is a drastic action. I disagree with some of the approach you use to arrive at them:
a.) Problems are solved by people being invested in solving them, not process. This requires the antithesis of "Units" - Ownership; Ownership in the company, Ownership of the mission, and a direct heart felt connection to the success of the company. Until you have staff, from the CEO down, that own problems, from the mess in the coffee room to server down time, you will have a "business house of cards" no matter how good the process. In fact, most of the time, fixing things involves re-writing and/or reconsidering process - usually starting with asking the question - "Do we really need that?"
b.) Sometimes you really do have a train wreck on your hands. If you have mastered a.) b follows almost effortlessly, because now, you can *talk* about this behemoth that is eating your company and everybody sees the discussion for what it is, not empire building or managerial fingerprinting.
when you run into a train wreck - assess your tech problem - is the fix easily found? Are your processes using the software at cross purposes? if so, which is cheaper to fix? No amount of bug fixing will repair using the wrong software. It won't even fix using the right software in the wrong way.
In the end, re-asses often, be frugal, not cheap, if it truly is a requirement to run your business, buy the most appropriate. If you've made the mistake of buying a Kenworth long hauler when you needed 3 old UPS trucks - admit it, sell it back, take your loss and get what you really need.
Thats not "magical thinking" it's just common sense.
I heartily second this recomendation. This is the best guide I've found for lab electronics. I was a lab manager in a low temp fluid dynamics lab while a graduate student and I used to hand out my spare copy (yes, it's that good.) on a regular basis. Bunches of Phd Physics folk have been trained from this book.
I have to disagree - The Deskpro line and their servers were junk too. There was a brief shining moment when they rose to acceptable, but it was all to short, and *expensive*!
I had to support our customers that *insisted* on using these systems in a 24/7 environment. What lowered the score for me was that *everything* was custom! Even the bloody Power Supply was "Custom" compaq only. Oh No, off the shelf ram wouldn't do, won't work - gotta have Compaqs special buffering, or voltage, etc... The geometry of the motherboards wasn't even standard!
And of course, none of our globally distributed customers wanted to keep a cold spare on site... Enough, they were non-compatible C**P.
Song writers should still get their due income. Their work is protected under copyright law. They should get paid for every sheet of their music sold, not for every time someone hears it.
And they got it wrong - back in the beginning of radio. Doesn't mean we shouldn't fix it.
It was only a performance when it was "live in studio". "live in studio" is just a really long mic cord:-)
But recordings? give me a break - if the musicians didn't have to show up - it's not a performance.
The radio industry caved to ASCAP and the RIAA : read about the whole payola scandal back in the dawn of radio sometime. They were passing money around in loops as bad as Enron. Stations holding up RIAA for money or they wouldn't play their new hit wonder - RIAA holding up the stations for money or they wouldn't get the hits when the got popular - who's the losers - Musicians and Listeners....
It's not a performance if I
Play your CD
Hear your Song on the Radio
Look at your album jacket...
It's a performance if:
You come to my house and play,
Hold a concert
Play on a street corner or a subway
Everyone in the chain of production needs to quit pretending that somehow, each time that CD is played, they have put in a personal appearance.// rant off
Performance as defined above is the method the bulk of working musicians actually make money. The RIAA just doesn't want to admit it.
SPOT - Nice system - I may have to get me one of those...
An adapted device could be hand-held and run on AA batteries. Just add the RFID scanner, rudimentary code to filter/format the data, and it's good.
Now, I'm an instrument developer by day, and I've built systems like that (more primitive tech, but when in New Mexico - shoot rockets...). I know what it takes to do that kind of integration -- If I was a rancher in the western U.S., before I agreed to anything - I'd want to see at least two vendors showing systems. Because of the radically lower demand (lots fewer ranchers than hikers) and the customization - add a zero to the price - so it's ~2000. *per ranch hand*. That fits right into the "they are tryin' to run us out" way of thinking.
That said, if I was wandering around out there, I'd like one... cool toy....
O.K - having just returned from my vacation in Oregon "cow country" (prospecting for sunstones), I can clue you in on what's wrong with your world view.
Having looked at the program - the information they are trying to gain is - where has the cow been, and what other livestock has it associated with. This means that you have to read the chip and report, every time an animal is moved. It may happen more frequently, but moves would happen at least from high to low pastures and back - because of the weather.
So you have lots of reads, sometimes on small numbers of cattle. For the collected information to be useful it's got to be timely. Most people don't appreciate the scale of even eastern Oregon (much less New Mexico - I've lived in both). This leads up to the next problem -
THERE IS NO CELLULAR ACCESS - there isn't cell access for 100 miles in any direction from where I was. Heck, even the 162.XX weather radio was inaudable (I'm a ham, too) So much for your "low cost cellular scanner". Sat Radio would work - know what an irridium set with data costs? Not cheap, and every hand moving cattle has to have one.
Basically, it's clear that this rule was proposed by people who don't have a clear picture of the area they are asking this to be applied to - much less of the processes of the people who would actually do it.
There will be a resolution, it just may not mean money in IBM's pocket. IBM can decide to walk away from their counterclaims, but some kind of a settlement as part of a forced liquidation (precisely because SCO has no assets) is more likely in my mind, IBM having carried it this far. A settlement would be carried out by a trustee for the court, representing SCO's debtors in possetion.
That or SCO receives more PIPE FAIRY money.At which time, bankruptcy is no longer a protection.
Having done my graduate work in fluid dynamics, only half your statement is possibly correct. There is historical evidence for global climate change, both warming and cooling. If is our interest to maintain the current status quo, the climate as we know it, it is not at all clear what interventions we need to take, or what effect they might have.
Without simulations, that correctly model the real world. We have no way of knowing what our interventions might do.
If anyone is interested, I can elaborate. The short (and scary)answer is - resonance.
Slashdot Mirror
We do, I think the difference is that my experience has been fixing projects starting from a technical complaint to an outside organization and helping those in an IT/Technology organization drive changes up thru their organization, often into the CEO space when needed. From your choice of wording, I suspect, your experience in this might start higher up the product chain.
I probably expressed that poorly. To put it another, hopefully more correct way - For organizations you can help (there are plenty that are unreceptive to this kind of help) you have to have to start with the culture. Identify those who have true involvement, are willing to risk take, have decision power... and get all of them committed before you can fix the process, which then finally lets you help fix the bugs/tech. Lather, rinse, repeat till organization functions.
In particularly ill organizations, there is no way to separate these items (or the combatant parties :-)) long enough to obtain a fix. You have to wait till the financial realities drive some common sense into the organization. Sadly, for many businesses, this is too late
I'm going to tackle some of the conceptual problems that are hinted at above, which is usually where the difficulties lie, usually in trying to use the wrong software and expecting to somehow "make everything better" if you just make it work "my way" - the true "Magical Thinking".
I tend to agree with your conclusions, "wipe the slate clean" is a drastic action. I disagree with some of the approach you use to arrive at them:
a.) Problems are solved by people being invested in solving them, not process. This requires the antithesis of "Units" - Ownership; Ownership in the company, Ownership of the mission, and a direct heart felt connection to the success of the company. Until you have staff, from the CEO down, that own problems, from the mess in the coffee room to server down time, you will have a "business house of cards" no matter how good the process. In fact, most of the time, fixing things involves re-writing and/or reconsidering process - usually starting with asking the question - "Do we really need that?"
b.) Sometimes you really do have a train wreck on your hands. If you have mastered a.) b follows almost effortlessly, because now, you can *talk* about this behemoth that is eating your company and everybody sees the discussion for what it is, not empire building or managerial fingerprinting.
when you run into a train wreck - assess your tech problem - is the fix easily found? Are your processes using the software at cross purposes? if so, which is cheaper to fix? No amount of bug fixing will repair using the wrong software. It won't even fix using the right software in the wrong way.
In the end, re-asses often, be frugal, not cheap, if it truly is a requirement to run your business, buy the most appropriate. If you've made the mistake of buying a Kenworth long hauler when you needed 3 old UPS trucks - admit it, sell it back, take your loss and get what you really need.
Thats not "magical thinking" it's just common sense.
I heartily second this recomendation. This is the best guide I've found for lab electronics. I was a lab manager in a low temp fluid dynamics lab while a graduate student and I used to hand out my spare copy (yes, it's that good.) on a regular basis. Bunches of Phd Physics folk have been trained from this book.
I have to disagree - The Deskpro line and their servers were junk too. There was a brief shining moment when they rose to acceptable, but it was all to short, and *expensive*!
I had to support our customers that *insisted* on using these systems in a 24/7 environment. What lowered the score for me was that *everything* was custom! Even the bloody Power Supply was "Custom" compaq only. Oh No, off the shelf ram wouldn't do, won't work - gotta have Compaqs special buffering, or voltage, etc... The geometry of the motherboards wasn't even standard!
And of course, none of our globally distributed customers wanted to keep a cold spare on site... Enough, they were non-compatible C**P.
Song writers should still get their due income. Their work is protected under copyright law. They should get paid for every sheet of their music sold, not for every time someone hears it.
And they got it wrong - back in the beginning of radio. Doesn't mean we shouldn't fix it.
It was only a performance when it was "live in studio". "live in studio" is just a really long mic cord :-)
But recordings? give me a break - if the musicians didn't have to show up - it's not a performance.
The radio industry caved to ASCAP and the RIAA : read about the whole payola scandal back in the dawn of radio sometime. They were passing money around in loops as bad as Enron. Stations holding up RIAA for money or they wouldn't play their new hit wonder - RIAA holding up the stations for money or they wouldn't get the hits when the got popular - who's the losers - Musicians and Listeners....
Sorry -
To me:
RIAA == container object for the pop music industry.
ASCAP - Bad symptom of above...
I'm aware of the different roles - having had to buy rights to music for theatrical productions from ASCAP (with live musicians - yeah!)
It's not a performance if I ...
Play your CD
Hear your Song on the Radio
Look at your album jacket
It's a performance if:
You come to my house and play,
Hold a concert
Play on a street corner or a subway
Everyone in the chain of production needs to quit pretending that somehow, each time that CD is played, they have put in a personal appearance. // rant off
Performance as defined above is the method the bulk of working musicians actually make money. The RIAA just doesn't want to admit it.
SPOT - Nice system - I may have to get me one of those...
An adapted device could be hand-held and run on AA batteries. Just add the RFID scanner, rudimentary code to filter/format the data, and it's good.
Now, I'm an instrument developer by day, and I've built systems like that (more primitive tech, but when in New Mexico - shoot rockets...). I know what it takes to do that kind of integration -- If I was a rancher in the western U.S., before I agreed to anything - I'd want to see at least two vendors showing systems. Because of the radically lower demand (lots fewer ranchers than hikers) and the customization - add a zero to the price - so it's ~2000. *per ranch hand*. That fits right into the "they are tryin' to run us out" way of thinking.
That said, if I was wandering around out there, I'd like one... cool toy....
O.K - having just returned from my vacation in Oregon "cow country" (prospecting for sunstones), I can clue you in on what's wrong with your world view.
Having looked at the program - the information they are trying to gain is - where has the cow been, and what other livestock has it associated with. This means that you have to read the chip and report, every time an animal is moved. It may happen more frequently, but moves would happen at least from high to low pastures and back - because of the weather.
So you have lots of reads, sometimes on small numbers of cattle. For the collected information to be useful it's got to be timely. Most people don't appreciate the scale of even eastern Oregon (much less New Mexico - I've lived in both). This leads up to the next problem -
THERE IS NO CELLULAR ACCESS - there isn't cell access for 100 miles in any direction from where I was. Heck, even the 162.XX weather radio was inaudable (I'm a ham, too) So much for your "low cost cellular scanner". Sat Radio would work - know what an irridium set with data costs? Not cheap, and every hand moving cattle has to have one.
Basically, it's clear that this rule was proposed by people who don't have a clear picture of the area they are asking this to be applied to - much less of the processes of the people who would actually do it.
Hate to explain a joke, but-
The line is from one of Harlans more famous books and goes " "REPENT Harlanquin!" Said the TICTOC man."
I did - I love my eeePC - scrubed Xandros - installed ubuntu - not goin' back
There will be a resolution, it just may not mean money in IBM's pocket. IBM can decide to walk away from their counterclaims, but some kind of a settlement as part of a forced liquidation (precisely because SCO has no assets) is more likely in my mind, IBM having carried it this far. A settlement would be carried out by a trustee for the court, representing SCO's debtors in possetion.
That or SCO receives more PIPE FAIRY money.At which time, bankruptcy is no longer a protection.
IBM is still stayed by bankruptcy court. Before it's all over, IBM's counterclaims will have to be answered.
Having done my graduate work in fluid dynamics, only half your statement is possibly correct. There is historical evidence for global climate change, both warming and cooling. If is our interest to maintain the current status quo, the climate as we know it, it is not at all clear what interventions we need to take, or what effect they might have. Without simulations, that correctly model the real world. We have no way of knowing what our interventions might do. If anyone is interested, I can elaborate. The short (and scary)answer is - resonance.