Well, this has been an interesting week. I worked from home for most of the week, so that I could provide assistance to my mother. She lives with us, and at the moment, needs help with pretty much everything, from the moment she gets up until she goes to sleep. And sometimes in that midnight interval, too. She's not completely helpless, since she can move with a walker, but she's tied down to an oxygen tank, so wherever she goes, she trails a thin plastic line. She tires very easy, and can be freaked out by the most modest of problems. My partner and I have come to the realization that this is, in many ways, exactly what it was like when we took care of my daughter, after she was born. She got over it, and can handle herself just fine now. We're hoping that my mother makes the same transition.
Saturday, April 26, 2003
Sunday, April 20, 2003
Last night, I turned to my partner at one point and said "If I ever get like that, just shoot me."
The occasion was the arrival home of my mother from her extended hospital stay after bypass surgery. She had done well in the hospital, and was then transferred to a rehabilitation hospital. At the time, we were perplexed, because she had seemed fine -- tiring quickly, and occasionally short of breath, but nothing that seemed unduly unsettling, given the circumstances. But now, at home, after two weeks in the rehab hospital, she seems frail, easily disoriented, and prone to panic.
Just shoot me.
The occasion was the arrival home of my mother from her extended hospital stay after bypass surgery. She had done well in the hospital, and was then transferred to a rehabilitation hospital. At the time, we were perplexed, because she had seemed fine -- tiring quickly, and occasionally short of breath, but nothing that seemed unduly unsettling, given the circumstances. But now, at home, after two weeks in the rehab hospital, she seems frail, easily disoriented, and prone to panic.
Just shoot me.
Tuesday, April 15, 2003
I came across this paragraph while reading an article about cognitive psychology on the Hershey Medical Center's www.hmc.psu.edu/informatics page. Although it is specifically oriented to medical failures, citing comments by Richard Cook, an anesthesiologist, on the subject, I thought it was worth repeating as a general observation.
"Cook maintains that complex systems fail when a series of latent failures, each insufficient to cause an accident by itself, come together. He likens this to a pile of Swiss cheese slices: the latent failures are the holes, and when they line up, they form a tunnel through which safety falls. The result: an accident. No one person is to blame, yet all too often organisations respond to disaster by finding a culprit to blame, re-training the staff, issuing new regulations, and investing in "safer" technology. This sort of reaction is all the more likely because of what Cook calls "hindsight bias": the tendency to allow one's knowledge of the outcome to bias one's view of the events leading up to that outcome. But this reaction tends to obscure the complexities that actually led to the disaster, makes the system even more complex, and consequently introduces new opportunities for failure."
"Cook maintains that complex systems fail when a series of latent failures, each insufficient to cause an accident by itself, come together. He likens this to a pile of Swiss cheese slices: the latent failures are the holes, and when they line up, they form a tunnel through which safety falls. The result: an accident. No one person is to blame, yet all too often organisations respond to disaster by finding a culprit to blame, re-training the staff, issuing new regulations, and investing in "safer" technology. This sort of reaction is all the more likely because of what Cook calls "hindsight bias": the tendency to allow one's knowledge of the outcome to bias one's view of the events leading up to that outcome. But this reaction tends to obscure the complexities that actually led to the disaster, makes the system even more complex, and consequently introduces new opportunities for failure."
Monday, April 14, 2003
I learned an interesting bit of trivia last night. The 'Ides' of March is an event that will actually occur every month. Four months of the year, it's on the fifteenth; for the others, it's on the thirteenth.
And in the newspaper on this month's Ides, unintentionally funny articles. One says that well, sure, Hussein was bad, but he would have died, eventually; this 'freedom' thing the Americans brought over will never go away. Therefore, we're in more trouble now than before. Another repors the lament of an Iraqi museum director that Iraqis looted his museum; the Americans should have provided security for it, therefore, its the Americans' fault.
What troublemakers these Americans are! Glad to be one.
And in the newspaper on this month's Ides, unintentionally funny articles. One says that well, sure, Hussein was bad, but he would have died, eventually; this 'freedom' thing the Americans brought over will never go away. Therefore, we're in more trouble now than before. Another repors the lament of an Iraqi museum director that Iraqis looted his museum; the Americans should have provided security for it, therefore, its the Americans' fault.
What troublemakers these Americans are! Glad to be one.
Friday, April 11, 2003
One of the functions of an expert should be to filter all -- or mostly all -- of the details of an activity from the person for whom the activity is being done. They should be a black box, where all the recipient knows is that the function was done, and output was created.
I was just reading the documentation for a capacity planning tool. The tool was written by some people whom I'm gonna assume as smarter than me; certainly more experienced in what they do than me. The goal of the tool is to let someone of reasonable intelligence figure out some things about a mainframe computing environment -- things that would be really helpful to know, such as; if we continue to grow workload at the current rate, when will we run out of capacity? To a capacity planner, that's a 'it depends' question. (Actually, sometimes it seems like everything, including "What did you have for lunch today?", is a 'it depends' question to them). But in this case, it really is, because the question translates into this: If we continue to grow workload at the current rate, assuming that all of the components grow at the same rate, and assuming we know what we mean by 'grow', when will we get to a point where we either a)dislike the response time or turnaround, b) despise it, or c) have to stop running some things so that we have enough capacity to run others'. This is where the person asking the question starts making hand motions which are intended to convey disgust with this pettifoggery; just answer the damn question already! And so the expert does, using round numbers, shrugs, and the occasional muttered ' it depends'.
What brought all this on was that the documentation that I was reading seems to have been written for a bright five year old. It uses lots of complex concepts (the bright part) and says really obvious things (if you don't like the screen color, you can change it). Okay, perhaps that isn't so obvious, but there's something about the way they say it that makes me want to skip to another paragraph in search of immediately useful information. Just answer the damn question already! In this case, the expert (them) is not shielding the user (me) from the details. They might not be tellling me everything about what it takes to do the function, but they're telling me way more than I wanted to know. I just want to push the button, turn the crank, and get the answer.
Is that too much to ask? (I can hear the expert's resounding answer.)
I was just reading the documentation for a capacity planning tool. The tool was written by some people whom I'm gonna assume as smarter than me; certainly more experienced in what they do than me. The goal of the tool is to let someone of reasonable intelligence figure out some things about a mainframe computing environment -- things that would be really helpful to know, such as; if we continue to grow workload at the current rate, when will we run out of capacity? To a capacity planner, that's a 'it depends' question. (Actually, sometimes it seems like everything, including "What did you have for lunch today?", is a 'it depends' question to them). But in this case, it really is, because the question translates into this: If we continue to grow workload at the current rate, assuming that all of the components grow at the same rate, and assuming we know what we mean by 'grow', when will we get to a point where we either a)dislike the response time or turnaround, b) despise it, or c) have to stop running some things so that we have enough capacity to run others'. This is where the person asking the question starts making hand motions which are intended to convey disgust with this pettifoggery; just answer the damn question already! And so the expert does, using round numbers, shrugs, and the occasional muttered ' it depends'.
What brought all this on was that the documentation that I was reading seems to have been written for a bright five year old. It uses lots of complex concepts (the bright part) and says really obvious things (if you don't like the screen color, you can change it). Okay, perhaps that isn't so obvious, but there's something about the way they say it that makes me want to skip to another paragraph in search of immediately useful information. Just answer the damn question already! In this case, the expert (them) is not shielding the user (me) from the details. They might not be tellling me everything about what it takes to do the function, but they're telling me way more than I wanted to know. I just want to push the button, turn the crank, and get the answer.
Is that too much to ask? (I can hear the expert's resounding answer.)
Wednesday, April 09, 2003
Sunday, March 30, 2003
I am sitting in my kitchen, watching it snow.
This, in a place where it was almost seventy degrees, three days ago, and where the weather gnomes tell us that it will be, again, tomorrow. They speak glibly of Canadian weather fronts, and masses of cold air, but all I know is that the buds I had seen on a couple of the trees, yesterday, are now being covered with snow. They're probably thinking "Oh, this can't be good."
My mother is in a 'rehabilitation hospital', recovering from a heart bypass operation. When I first heard of a heart bypass, I thought it meant that the heart was actually being bypassed, and wondered what was doing the blood pumping. Now I know a little more about it, thanks to the Web. . Doctors like to complain about people looking things up on the Internet, and then coming in with this information, but based on my mother's experience, it's a good thing, and they're just going to have to live with it. No one in this process, since the operation, has been very forthcoming with information. I suspect its because to them, my mother is just another heart, just another elderly person. They don't mean her ill, but they're not particularly warm and compassionate, either. It will be good to get her home.
I'm amazed how inept our government has been in the battle for minds that has to correspond with the physical battle going on in Iraq. Whenever I heard official pronouncements, they sound as if they were crafted for John Wayne in a cowboy movie. I expect to heard Colin Powell say to Irag 'Aw, you made a bad move, pilgrim'. I'm particularly fascinated by the woman who's the Department of Defense briefer. She sounds smart and brisk, also impatient and weary of lesser minds. I'm also taken by her clothes. I think she's dressed by the Joker.
This, in a place where it was almost seventy degrees, three days ago, and where the weather gnomes tell us that it will be, again, tomorrow. They speak glibly of Canadian weather fronts, and masses of cold air, but all I know is that the buds I had seen on a couple of the trees, yesterday, are now being covered with snow. They're probably thinking "Oh, this can't be good."
My mother is in a 'rehabilitation hospital', recovering from a heart bypass operation. When I first heard of a heart bypass, I thought it meant that the heart was actually being bypassed, and wondered what was doing the blood pumping. Now I know a little more about it, thanks to the Web. . Doctors like to complain about people looking things up on the Internet, and then coming in with this information, but based on my mother's experience, it's a good thing, and they're just going to have to live with it. No one in this process, since the operation, has been very forthcoming with information. I suspect its because to them, my mother is just another heart, just another elderly person. They don't mean her ill, but they're not particularly warm and compassionate, either. It will be good to get her home.
I'm amazed how inept our government has been in the battle for minds that has to correspond with the physical battle going on in Iraq. Whenever I heard official pronouncements, they sound as if they were crafted for John Wayne in a cowboy movie. I expect to heard Colin Powell say to Irag 'Aw, you made a bad move, pilgrim'. I'm particularly fascinated by the woman who's the Department of Defense briefer. She sounds smart and brisk, also impatient and weary of lesser minds. I'm also taken by her clothes. I think she's dressed by the Joker.
Wednesday, March 26, 2003
Like others, I'm neutral about this war. I don't know if it's right or wrong. I don't trust Hussein, and I think it's likely that he supports actions that are against our well-being. He probably would love to grab control of oil-fields, and he probably wouldn't mind seeing more planes ramming into buildings here, either. On the other side, I don't trust what I'm hearing from our president and his various flunkies. I think they'll say whatever they have to say to support what they want, and if that should change, why, they'll blithely change what they say.
Today I hear that perhaps this won't be a quick war after all. We've already learned that it isn't going to be an antiseptic one, and now sources say that it might take longer than they thought. American soldiers have surrendered, and may have been shot while doing so. This leaves a bad taste in my mouth, but not enough of one to make me say the war is wrong. Or right.
I just love being ambivalent.
Today I hear that perhaps this won't be a quick war after all. We've already learned that it isn't going to be an antiseptic one, and now sources say that it might take longer than they thought. American soldiers have surrendered, and may have been shot while doing so. This leaves a bad taste in my mouth, but not enough of one to make me say the war is wrong. Or right.
I just love being ambivalent.
Monday, March 24, 2003
The aftershocks from yesterday's system problem continue to rumble out. Small forest creatures are dashing for safety, while the larger ones rise up to paw the air and snarl defiance.
It turns out that the two problems were related to a command entered incorrectly, and to a failure to make a change that was needed to allow the 'real' change to work. I knew about the need for the supporting change, but I did not check to see if it had been made. It wasn't my responsibility, so, although I thought about it, I didn't check to see if it had been done. I feel badly about that. I have an index card on the wall over my desk. On the index card, it says 'Own the problem'. I didn't live up to that credo. It wasn't my responsibility to handle that problem, but I should have made it mine. I didn't own the problem.
One problem that I've had for years is that I always think that I can solve any complex problem. When I find out that it resists direct resolution, I get morose and down on myself. Today, I challenged myself to come up with a method that would be easy, flexible, transparent, and effective in catching things like that -- reminding us to make the same changes in production as in test. When I couldn't come up with one, I got pretty disgusted. I resent the idea that I can't solve things like this by myself.
Not such a good day.
It turns out that the two problems were related to a command entered incorrectly, and to a failure to make a change that was needed to allow the 'real' change to work. I knew about the need for the supporting change, but I did not check to see if it had been made. It wasn't my responsibility, so, although I thought about it, I didn't check to see if it had been done. I feel badly about that. I have an index card on the wall over my desk. On the index card, it says 'Own the problem'. I didn't live up to that credo. It wasn't my responsibility to handle that problem, but I should have made it mine. I didn't own the problem.
One problem that I've had for years is that I always think that I can solve any complex problem. When I find out that it resists direct resolution, I get morose and down on myself. Today, I challenged myself to come up with a method that would be easy, flexible, transparent, and effective in catching things like that -- reminding us to make the same changes in production as in test. When I couldn't come up with one, I got pretty disgusted. I resent the idea that I can't solve things like this by myself.
Not such a good day.
Sunday, March 23, 2003
I despise incompetence.
This morning, I went in to work in order to assist a person with a problem. I identified the problem (which was luck, not skill), only to find out that the people running the system didn't know that the change had been made. We run change reports every week to tell them what's going to change over the weekend, so either we didn't create a change record, the record was created but it wasn't lucid to the technicians running the system, or they never looked at the report.
When we went to back out the change, we found that the person -- my ire wells up in me even now, two hours later -- who had made the change put the enabling command in a place where no one would have guessed. We had to call him to find out where it was. (I was glad that we woke him up.)
Then, restarting the system, we found that a critical subsystem would not start -- and the reason was that the same person had copied a module overe from the test system. Now, this was not a bad thing -- but once again, the people running the system didn't know about the change. See the above comments.
I despise incompetence.
This morning, I went in to work in order to assist a person with a problem. I identified the problem (which was luck, not skill), only to find out that the people running the system didn't know that the change had been made. We run change reports every week to tell them what's going to change over the weekend, so either we didn't create a change record, the record was created but it wasn't lucid to the technicians running the system, or they never looked at the report.
When we went to back out the change, we found that the person -- my ire wells up in me even now, two hours later -- who had made the change put the enabling command in a place where no one would have guessed. We had to call him to find out where it was. (I was glad that we woke him up.)
Then, restarting the system, we found that a critical subsystem would not start -- and the reason was that the same person had copied a module overe from the test system. Now, this was not a bad thing -- but once again, the people running the system didn't know about the change. See the above comments.
I despise incompetence.
Friday, March 21, 2003
Well, this is an interesting morning. Mostly good.
My mother's bypass surgery went well yesterday. The procedure is known as a Coronary Artery Bypass Graft, or CABG; I've always thought that was an inelegant name, but that has no bearing on the process itself. I was surprised to learn that the person doing the surgery could not (or would not) say how many bypasses would be done, but would rather make that decision once the surgery had started. Not that it matters, of course; one or fifty, the goal is the same. I got to see my mother immediately the surgery was over; she was mostly out, but did respond when my partner came to see her, about three hours later. I am very pleased.
Its a foggy day here. Coming across the bridge, I couldn't see into the water, or the small mountain that rises majestically (well, what passes for majestically around here) off to the north. I'm always a little bit fascinated to see the 'tunnel' that the moving traffic makes in the shroud of fog over the bridge. I'm sure there are people who can speak competently and at length about that tunnel; I think it's just a nifty visual effect. I had my Bering Strait CD blasting as I drove; I don't normally play music that loud, but I really like this CD, and it puts me in a good mood -- bouncing around in my seat, just like the goofs you see on TV who are listening to Eminem or whomever.
About the only downer today, in fact, is that I haven't gotten any email lately from a friend out in California. We're not close friends, but we keep in touch. Unfortunately, it's frequently a one-way correspondence. She's told me repeatedly that she is much better at responding than initiating. That's certainly true. Even responses are not as frequent as I'd like, though. Sometimes, a week or more will go by. As a result, I sometimes wonder if I’m just a B-list friend -- or even if my messages are sometimes being eaten by an Outlook agent upon receipt, disappearing into the void. Pop! Then a response comes, and I tell myself that I’m simply expecting too much from someone who spends her life on the run. Could be. Usually, the pleasure of her company is worth it. Sometimes, though....
But overall, its a good day. Glad to be here.
My mother's bypass surgery went well yesterday. The procedure is known as a Coronary Artery Bypass Graft, or CABG; I've always thought that was an inelegant name, but that has no bearing on the process itself. I was surprised to learn that the person doing the surgery could not (or would not) say how many bypasses would be done, but would rather make that decision once the surgery had started. Not that it matters, of course; one or fifty, the goal is the same. I got to see my mother immediately the surgery was over; she was mostly out, but did respond when my partner came to see her, about three hours later. I am very pleased.
Its a foggy day here. Coming across the bridge, I couldn't see into the water, or the small mountain that rises majestically (well, what passes for majestically around here) off to the north. I'm always a little bit fascinated to see the 'tunnel' that the moving traffic makes in the shroud of fog over the bridge. I'm sure there are people who can speak competently and at length about that tunnel; I think it's just a nifty visual effect. I had my Bering Strait CD blasting as I drove; I don't normally play music that loud, but I really like this CD, and it puts me in a good mood -- bouncing around in my seat, just like the goofs you see on TV who are listening to Eminem or whomever.
About the only downer today, in fact, is that I haven't gotten any email lately from a friend out in California. We're not close friends, but we keep in touch. Unfortunately, it's frequently a one-way correspondence. She's told me repeatedly that she is much better at responding than initiating. That's certainly true. Even responses are not as frequent as I'd like, though. Sometimes, a week or more will go by. As a result, I sometimes wonder if I’m just a B-list friend -- or even if my messages are sometimes being eaten by an Outlook agent upon receipt, disappearing into the void. Pop! Then a response comes, and I tell myself that I’m simply expecting too much from someone who spends her life on the run. Could be. Usually, the pleasure of her company is worth it. Sometimes, though....
But overall, its a good day. Glad to be here.
Saturday, March 15, 2003
Anyone want a brand new, only used and deinstalled once, copy of Quicken 2003? Cheap....
After years of using Quicken 6 happily, putting up with its occasional flaws, I upgraded to Q03. Two hours later, furious, I deinstalled it. The product is not much better than it was seven years ago -- but it's a lot glossier, a lot more complicated, and, the killing point, a lot more willing to intrude on the experience with ads for their other products. Go to enter credit card information on the special form? There's a non-deletable button to order the Quicken credit card. Try to view your check register? There's a non-deletable right column with ads for products you can buy from them. Try to maximize the screen? Theres a reserved line at the bottom that is used to run trailers about other products you can buy. And let's not forget the non-deletable buttons on the menu bar for other Intuit services that you can buy.
They fixed one thing that I had thought would be a nice-to-have, didn't put in one thing that I really wanted, and junked up the product, overall. I recall that Microsoft tried to buy the company years ago. Now I see why. They share the same you work our way, not the reverse, philosophy. Pity. I hear they were quite good, once.
But I did learn one thing out of this. When buying software, go to eBay to see how many copies are being offered there. If a lot, perhaps the product's not worthy of your money.
Maybe they could change the name to Sludge.
After years of using Quicken 6 happily, putting up with its occasional flaws, I upgraded to Q03. Two hours later, furious, I deinstalled it. The product is not much better than it was seven years ago -- but it's a lot glossier, a lot more complicated, and, the killing point, a lot more willing to intrude on the experience with ads for their other products. Go to enter credit card information on the special form? There's a non-deletable button to order the Quicken credit card. Try to view your check register? There's a non-deletable right column with ads for products you can buy from them. Try to maximize the screen? Theres a reserved line at the bottom that is used to run trailers about other products you can buy. And let's not forget the non-deletable buttons on the menu bar for other Intuit services that you can buy.
They fixed one thing that I had thought would be a nice-to-have, didn't put in one thing that I really wanted, and junked up the product, overall. I recall that Microsoft tried to buy the company years ago. Now I see why. They share the same you work our way, not the reverse, philosophy. Pity. I hear they were quite good, once.
But I did learn one thing out of this. When buying software, go to eBay to see how many copies are being offered there. If a lot, perhaps the product's not worthy of your money.
Maybe they could change the name to Sludge.
Saturday, March 08, 2003
You hear a lot about how the Internet will make/already has made a change in the shopping experience. Usually, the comments are either so qualified, hedged, and otherwise dense that they could stop neutrinos, or so airy, hopeful, and content-free that they make soap bubbles look rigid. But I just heard one a bit ago that brought this idea a little into focus for me.
My partner and I were talking about our copy of Quicken, which we've had lo, these many years -- at least six or seven, I think -- and how sometimes it has some quirks that might suggest that it's time to upgrade. Now, being a computer guy, I know that software packages don't just wear out.... but being a computer user, I know that of course they do. So we agreed that we would look to see what the least expensive version was of Quicken that would do what we wanted. It would be nice if it did a little more -- like let us download directly from our banks, rather than have to key stuff in manually-- and it would be nice if it talked to Excel, too, or at least had better charting ability than our old version had. But our primary bank (which is owned by a computer company) hasn't quite figured out how to supply friendly and/or effective service via its web site; suggesting direct download to them is equivalent to asking for the keys to the vault. And our local bank is very heavily into pumping every possible nickel out of every transaction, so the idea that they'll just let us pipe in and grab our records in any useful format without charging for the privilege -- well, neither of us thought that would happen. So, we'll go with Quicken Basic (which will still have more bells and whistles than we want, and more pop-up ads, too).
But the thing that crystallized the Internet shopping experience for me was when my partner looked at me and said 'We can get this over the net, right? We don't have to go a store and actually buy the box?'
Maybe this Internet thing is worth it, after all.
My partner and I were talking about our copy of Quicken, which we've had lo, these many years -- at least six or seven, I think -- and how sometimes it has some quirks that might suggest that it's time to upgrade. Now, being a computer guy, I know that software packages don't just wear out.... but being a computer user, I know that of course they do. So we agreed that we would look to see what the least expensive version was of Quicken that would do what we wanted. It would be nice if it did a little more -- like let us download directly from our banks, rather than have to key stuff in manually-- and it would be nice if it talked to Excel, too, or at least had better charting ability than our old version had. But our primary bank (which is owned by a computer company) hasn't quite figured out how to supply friendly and/or effective service via its web site; suggesting direct download to them is equivalent to asking for the keys to the vault. And our local bank is very heavily into pumping every possible nickel out of every transaction, so the idea that they'll just let us pipe in and grab our records in any useful format without charging for the privilege -- well, neither of us thought that would happen. So, we'll go with Quicken Basic (which will still have more bells and whistles than we want, and more pop-up ads, too).
But the thing that crystallized the Internet shopping experience for me was when my partner looked at me and said 'We can get this over the net, right? We don't have to go a store and actually buy the box?'
Maybe this Internet thing is worth it, after all.
Wednesday, March 05, 2003
The sky is a cool blue over the austere white of the snow still blanketing much of the fields near the house. Occasionally, the cows can be seen in one of the middle fields, but they spend more time in the barn, where it's warm.
The world continues to be a strange place.
One news article notes that the US Secretary of State is accusing Saddam Hussein of trying to divide the Security Council. Another article points out that Iraq seems to bend just a little just before a meeting of the Security Council. Surely this isn't a surprise, so why is it news?
The Supreme Court says that sending a petty thief to prison for life does not constitute unreasonable punishment. Granted, it was a 5 to 4 vote, but that's poor comfort. This is a clear case -- well, to me, if not to five members of that court -- where the rule of reason should be mixed into the rule of law.
Why would anyone believe that a tax cut would stimulate spending? It probably would allow spending by people who otherwise could not have, and by people who see no reason to be cautious, but when most people are subject to surprise firings by their company, doesn't that make it pretty silly to spend if you don't have to, and ifyou're not sure that your income is going to continue to come in? Surely it can't be that the people making this policy hope that everyone will throw caution to the winds, and just spend?
Nobody can control suicide bombers. But giving peace a chance doesn't seem to work, either. Is there a third option?
I think I'll go see if the cows will let me stay in the barn for a while.
The world continues to be a strange place.
One news article notes that the US Secretary of State is accusing Saddam Hussein of trying to divide the Security Council. Another article points out that Iraq seems to bend just a little just before a meeting of the Security Council. Surely this isn't a surprise, so why is it news?
The Supreme Court says that sending a petty thief to prison for life does not constitute unreasonable punishment. Granted, it was a 5 to 4 vote, but that's poor comfort. This is a clear case -- well, to me, if not to five members of that court -- where the rule of reason should be mixed into the rule of law.
Why would anyone believe that a tax cut would stimulate spending? It probably would allow spending by people who otherwise could not have, and by people who see no reason to be cautious, but when most people are subject to surprise firings by their company, doesn't that make it pretty silly to spend if you don't have to, and ifyou're not sure that your income is going to continue to come in? Surely it can't be that the people making this policy hope that everyone will throw caution to the winds, and just spend?
Nobody can control suicide bombers. But giving peace a chance doesn't seem to work, either. Is there a third option?
I think I'll go see if the cows will let me stay in the barn for a while.
Thursday, February 27, 2003
I've heard it said that people who try to see both sides of the issue end up with no viewpoint at all. I think that happens to me.
Take the ideas of bureaucracy and innovation. Because I work for a software company that does outsourced work for some state governments, I get to see the people who make some bureaucracies work. Seeing their web of organization charts, and the listings of their various responsibilities, I'm amazed that they function at all. A fair number of the people who work at these places are the classic bureaucrats, with not much motivating them except their next scheduled coffee break and retirement -- but not all, not by any means. A goodly number are intelligent and experienced at what they do. For someone to walk into their job and try to do it, or to redo it by 'reengineering' or ' improving the process' or any of the other buzzwords, is as likely to succeed as me being able to leap into the cab of a combine harvester, grab the knobs and levers, and run it smoothly down the lane. It's possible -- but not very likely.
Yet these same intelligent and experienced people are dead set against anything that changes the way they do business. Or if not dead set against it, at least dead set against anything but the most minor changes. They want to debate everything, and their favorite word is No, followed by their favorite phrases: We Can't Do That, We'd Have To Get Approval, and "We Need To Study That." The idea of Just Do It is anathema to them.
The thing is, if I had their responsibilities, I might well be that way, too. If I had a public customer that knows nothing of what it takes to do what I do, but knows 'they could do it better'; if I had no one defending me and encouraging me; if all the risk was downside -- I might become a coffee-break scheduler and retirement watcher, too.
How in the world can this be improved? How can we get these organizations to do what they are charged with doing, but do it with verve, style, and speed? How can we get them to embrace change when they soak every day in a culture that rejects it?
Is this why governments hire business people to enforce change?
Take the ideas of bureaucracy and innovation. Because I work for a software company that does outsourced work for some state governments, I get to see the people who make some bureaucracies work. Seeing their web of organization charts, and the listings of their various responsibilities, I'm amazed that they function at all. A fair number of the people who work at these places are the classic bureaucrats, with not much motivating them except their next scheduled coffee break and retirement -- but not all, not by any means. A goodly number are intelligent and experienced at what they do. For someone to walk into their job and try to do it, or to redo it by 'reengineering' or ' improving the process' or any of the other buzzwords, is as likely to succeed as me being able to leap into the cab of a combine harvester, grab the knobs and levers, and run it smoothly down the lane. It's possible -- but not very likely.
Yet these same intelligent and experienced people are dead set against anything that changes the way they do business. Or if not dead set against it, at least dead set against anything but the most minor changes. They want to debate everything, and their favorite word is No, followed by their favorite phrases: We Can't Do That, We'd Have To Get Approval, and "We Need To Study That." The idea of Just Do It is anathema to them.
The thing is, if I had their responsibilities, I might well be that way, too. If I had a public customer that knows nothing of what it takes to do what I do, but knows 'they could do it better'; if I had no one defending me and encouraging me; if all the risk was downside -- I might become a coffee-break scheduler and retirement watcher, too.
How in the world can this be improved? How can we get these organizations to do what they are charged with doing, but do it with verve, style, and speed? How can we get them to embrace change when they soak every day in a culture that rejects it?
Is this why governments hire business people to enforce change?
Tuesday, February 25, 2003
Monday, February 24, 2003
I spent most of today doing something that is quite boring to watch, and tedious to do. I wasn't exactly sure how to go about it, or how to tell if I was doing it well; further, I couldn't predict what a good outcome would be, except in the most general of terms. What I was doing is called Performance Tuning, and it is as much voodoo as art, and as much art as science. Steven King once said something to the effect that if you couldn't describe exactly what you were creating -- what the effect of your words would be -- then whatever else you were doing, it wasn't writing. Similarly, it's likely true that if I could not precisely describe how to do what I was doing, and what exactly the outcome should be, then whatever else I was doing, perhaps it wasn't Performance Tuning. Messing around, maybe. Nevertheless, it was great fun. Have I mentioned that I'm sort of a geek?
Some startling news in the paper today -- one good, one not so good.
The good: In the middle of the mess at Duke University regarding the transplant error, one surgeon has accepted fault for his part in the process that resulted in the girl's death. He assumed that an organ agency would have confirmed the recipient's blood type, which, in fact they did not. I am impressed by that acceptance. I don't know if he is taking the quick way out, but I would like to think that he is doing the honorable thing. It's been a while since I've seen anyone doing the honorable thing, so I don't really recognize it any more -- but I think this is what it looks like.
The not-so-good: The inventor of the Segway scooter says that he needs governmental assistance to make his scooter profitable, and he's hiring politically-connected follks to push the idea. This sort of bushwah is why its a lot easier to recognize the dishonorable in our society. At what point would he say 'no more goverment help, thanks' -- when the profits roll in? Reprehensible.
The good: In the middle of the mess at Duke University regarding the transplant error, one surgeon has accepted fault for his part in the process that resulted in the girl's death. He assumed that an organ agency would have confirmed the recipient's blood type, which, in fact they did not. I am impressed by that acceptance. I don't know if he is taking the quick way out, but I would like to think that he is doing the honorable thing. It's been a while since I've seen anyone doing the honorable thing, so I don't really recognize it any more -- but I think this is what it looks like.
The not-so-good: The inventor of the Segway scooter says that he needs governmental assistance to make his scooter profitable, and he's hiring politically-connected follks to push the idea. This sort of bushwah is why its a lot easier to recognize the dishonorable in our society. At what point would he say 'no more goverment help, thanks' -- when the profits roll in? Reprehensible.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)