Lists Home |
Date Index |
True. On the other hand, from the procurement perspective,
these principles or rules have a way of showing up in
discussions where the speakers have agendas and without
some actual substance, are just noise. I am searching
for signal. If the principle is mushy, let's be sure
to be able to show that by example, same for precision.
Think about the times one hears the term
'tipping point' when execs are discussing strategy
these days. How many of them actually know what an
ogee is, or an angle of repose, or a positive feedback
control? They believe it means 'we lock in our markets'
by saying yes to everything and taking the difference
in price out of the pockets of the employees through
smaller raises, fewer benefits, no cash incentives,
moving all the jobs but theirs to lower cost countries, etc.,
without trying to understand that it isn't possible
to lock some markets (commoditization isn't possible
or likely) and they won't make the investments required
to change that. You hear this one in the same breath
as 'we work for our stockholders' which is a crock on
the face of it. No one does that.
So it translates to "the beating of the employees to work
longer for less will recommence shortly".
Sad thing about the phrase "tipping point" is that it was
invented to describe 'white flight' from integrated
neighborhoods, not epidemiology as Gladwell sold it
in 2000 although it was adapted for that later.
I hate to see web architectural principles in the same
light as pop psychology. So if there really is a
deeper and clarifying principle here, one wants to be
able to express it in simple terms that the marketing
department can't screw up.
From: Rick Jelliffe [mailto:email@example.com]
Narrator: And then there were my father and mother. Two people who could
find an argument in any subject.
Father: Wait a minute. Are you telling me you think the Atlantic is a
greater ocean than the Pacific?
Mother: No, have it your way. The Pacific is greater.
Narrator: I mean, how many people fight over oceans?