Author: Maverisk

Cultural maturity – of organisations

Adding to the Maslow-for-organisations idea of December 3rd’s post; would it be possible to gauge an organization its maturity level by trying to establish its ‘score’ on the various pyramid layers (to be) established? Though immediately, I see trouble for the method where e.g., companies may get into (financial / freshness/motivational) trouble and sink back some layers. But then again, we may then look up in DSM-5 what ails the company, and find avenues to restore good health.

Hmmm, how is it that when thinking of corporate culture, one so quickly ends up at the mental disorder metaphor? And I jump in with the option of (boardroom consulting) intervention; highly profitable, for the firm if it hires me for that, and for me anyway.

So it seems not to hinge on the Maslow pyramid. Nevertheless, as diagnostic tool, it may help.

To keep you sane till I’ve fully developed the method:
DSCN4044[Calatravalencia]

Continuous AssuMining

… Where the process mining for overall assurance, as e.g., @ConeyDataDriven do so well, may spill over into straightforward data point assurance. Of sorts.
Because, when one has visual petri nets (well… sort of) at the transactions level(s) all through the systems, wouldn’t it be dead easy to have tallies at stores and flows, that can be reported on – and when audited in real time, given assurance on! – in all their shining minute detail as compared to the late, very late after-the-fact yes even after-the-full-year-has-ran-its-course annual figures.

This would of course require auditors to sit by all the information flows as they go, and have controllers at hand to correct any single transactions (and reporting) that go unwarranted ways. But hey, there’s tons of fees there, right? So it will happen. In one form or another.
More importantly: No need to keep on dwelling in XML/XBRL quagmires; that level of operational capability would need to be stable or one would lose out. Hence one can from some stage on assume that all transactions are indeed captured and passed through the systems interfaces at all (lower) levels OR some balances will fail – that’s what balances are for. Having established that, the bliss of control room overview will come to administrative(!!)-information flows:
Reliance - 4[Just plucked off the search results, for a refinery. But you get the idea…]

Would there be any roadblocks to this development? Your call.

Care-ful Carr

[In Dutch] Een boekbespreking…:

[Edited to add, this just in: Zelfs deze eminence grise denkt dezelfde kant heen…]

In zijn roemruchte artikel IT Doesn’t Matter (uitgewerkt in boekvorm: Does IT Matter?) maakte Nick Carr duidelijk dat de T van IT niet zo relevant (meer) is. Dit leidde tot een storm van protesten van degenen die baat hadden bij het behoud van het belang van de T. Steve Ballmer noemde het artikel “grote onzin”; hoeveel groter kan een compliment zijn ..? In de opvolger The Shallows (het Ondiepe) werkte hij dit verder uit naar een maatschappelijk niveau: Wij worden door gemakzucht van kritisch (diep) nadenkende burgers tot slappe oppervlakkige volgzame consumenten van informatie-fastfood.

In zijn nieuwste meesterstuk De Glazen Kooi (The Glass Cage) trekt Carr deze lijn door: Wij gaan als mensen daadwerkelijk anders denken; onze hersenen veranderen door de steeds verder doorzettende informatierevolutie. En anders dan bij de industriële revolutie zitten er steeds minder mensen aan de knoppen. We raken de regie kwijt…

Caar toont dit aan met een reeks van anekdotische, maar representatieve, voorbeelden. Waarbij hij telkens weer waarschuwt voor de degeneratie van onze hersenen en ons denken dat hierdoor wordt gestimuleerd. In wezen is dit dus een trendbreuk naar een negatieve spiraal, nadat de mensheid steeds slimmer was geworden. Afgezien van de vraag of de opwaartse lijn naar een Hegeliaans ideaal eindpunt voorheen überhaupt wel gold, zijn de tekenen van neergang nu onweerlegbaar voor de mensheid, net op het punt dat de Rede het van de mens gaat overnemen. Ondanks Carr’s onterechte idee door het hele verhaal dat machines nooit even creatief en weldenkend en … noem uw favoriete Menselijke eigenschap, zullen zijn als mensen – de uniciteit van de Mens telkens opnieuw zo moeten definiëren, is wél altijd al een terugtrekkende beweging gebleken.

Dit staat dan tegenover de optimistische visies van Kurzweil en anderen. Wie eerst De Glazen Kooi leest en daarna nog eens The Age of Spiritual Machines, zal zien dat de laatste toch wel wat naïef is… Beide naast elkaar houdend, lijkt het erop dat de dystopian visies op de Singularity en daarna, toch vooralsnog de beste argumenten hebben. Nu is het (ook) van alle tijden dat zulke negatieve visies de ronde doen. Carr weet dat, en is au fond ook niet alleen maar negatief – hij waarschuwt juist voor het gemakzuchtige idee van de optimisten dat er vast wel oplossingen voor de fundamentele ethische vragen van de nabije (sic) toekomst zullen komen én hij koppelt dat aan een oproep om in ieder geval op pad te gaan om die oplossingen met z’n allen te gaan maken. Niet afwachten dus, maar vormgeven.

Al met al is (ook) dit werk van Carr dus van harte aanbevelenswaardig. Omdat het geen juichverhaal is, en omdat het geen droefenis alom is. Maar een eye opener, één die ertoe doet en inzicht geeft, leert.

Afsluitend, voor de visuele ontspanning:
DSCN6719

Wired / Tired / Expired, December 2014 edition

DSCN0997
[What a Domènech i Muntaner masterpiece! Slept there, (private!) dined there. Both highly recommendable… Check out Mas Passamaner]

Yes here’s the December edition of my Wired / Tired / Expired jargon watch overviews, a mixed bag again. And, it will be the last in this form. Will switch to quarterly updates on what’s hot, and not. But then, still, for now:

WIRED TIRED EXPIRED
IoT security IoT Big Data
Even Stuxnet reappears. And there’s so much more… [To add: links to earlier posts, or use the search function it’s there not for nothing.] Yeah, we get the basics. Meh, we get the point (being: the center of a donut).
AI Self-driving cars Data analytics
It’s here and everywhere, suddenly. U-turned out to be not so self-aware as perceived earlier… More like semi-preprogrammed. Bandwagon stuff already, moving through the Trough of Disillusionment
Lightweight organisations Agile/robust organisations Certification
The kind of start-up that hires just about every service except for in-house employees (well, but a few, to coordinate – and do the pivoting and discovery inside the coordinating). Sourcing from just anywhere; they don’t care to even know where the sweatshop (mind-)labour is. Trying to turn around ULCCs by enforcing agility and robustness … top-down, hierarchically, using KPIs and other must-achieve performance numbers. Instead of … you know. Oh hey, we’ve got this sheet of paper up in the hall, now we’re safe and secure against all that the chaos of the universe may throw at us!
Sinterklaas Zwarte Piet Santa
The gift giver. Hence our #1. I’m sucking up by not a small bit here. Need to. The good (sic) guy(s) doing all the execution for the CEO. The CEO may not be around in tomorrow’s organization… As in this. The obese commercial patsy. Pure construct, no history, no veracity, no value.
Normally healthy Boring life healthy Tattoos
Taking a serious but Get Real approach to losing weight, detoxing, being fit, all in one great little step by little step, shave-off rather than lump-off program of not changing too much but at all sides at the same time. Crazily slimming down, etc., not sustainable and then bouncing back; in the long term, unhealthy and very unhappy bunny. Huh, now try to get rid of your big Error of judgement. No takedown like your Fubbuk pics, right?
Fighting the New Mediocre New Mediocre Conservatism
When Mme. Lagarde speaks out, it is worthwhile to take note… as here. Well yeah, Mehhh is always out of style. By which I mean, the not wanting to allow anyone to do their thing and be happy. Because it may make oneself look stupid and old, which is self-reinforcing in this way. Change will happen whether one fears and not wants it or still.

OK, any suggestions for next quarter’s (!) edition ..?

Repeat: The Top 2000 or 2214 of 2014

[After apparently, some at @Top2000nl / @NPORadio2 decided that #Top2000 entries and votes were valid until yesterday this repost was in order – but the below had been out there, of course, as the definitive results already a month ago…]

OK … There it is: The definitive this year’s Top 2000.
Without argument or doubt, herewith…
First, downloadable in plain Excel, for your own tinker and play, in this file; checked and clean (no subversive content).

Next, a few little notes:

  • “That’s odd! The usual numbers 1 to 50 aren’t where they’re ‘supposed’ to be by common standards!” Correct. Because I‘m ‘Rekt. The list is mine; why put the Mehhh songs high up there? They’re in there somewhere, but its my list, my preferences..! yes I do like some almost-forgotten songs better, sometimes much, much better, than the expired old hands.
  • Especially.. see the notes, when the clip (much) enhances the song(s). Wouldn’t that mean the song in itself isn’t fully complete ..? No, it means in (since) the age of video, songs with clips (‘integrated’) can much surpass mere songs by themselves, for a cubed sensory experience.
  • There’s more than 2000 yes. Because, already after the first 500 or so, determining the relative rankings becomes awkward. Hence, the cut-off would be random …! (why not 2048, that would make more sense in this digital (i.e., binary) age).
  • If you would still have some (preferably wacky) songs you miss, please do comment them to me. I’ll see whether I’d want to include them still, or not. Hey, it’s my list so I decide, geddid?
  • When dabbling with the Excel file yourself, feel free to play around with the ranking mechanism. What worked for me, was to first split the songs into bins of about 250 size (designate some song to be in the first bin that will end up being ranks 1-250, another song to bin 5, which is around the 1000-1250 mark, etc.), then sizing down bin 1 etc. to 8 smaller bins. Then, numbers 1-50 get a personal treatment one by one to their end rank, the rest gets (got) a random allocation within their bracket. After this, sort and re-apply number 1-whatever. Through this, actual intermediate bin sizes aren’t too important.
  • Huh waddayakno, before the below is published, I have a Challenge for you: To give Frizzle Sizzle, Luv and Erik Mesie some rightful places. If you’re Dutch otherwise you might just not get it. Others, may include the B52’s somewhere; Love Shack. And DÖF’s Codo. ☺ and oops forgot Thomas Dolby.
  • [Edited to add: I’m now working on an extended list, with the How Could I Have Missed These!? so the total keeps rising. For next year’s list.]

Then, as a long, very long list. With a Moar tag otherwise it would be ridiculous… [i.e., for the complete list in the post, follow the link:]

Continue reading “Repeat: The Top 2000 or 2214 of 2014”

Jumping the aggre chasm

On the subject of individuality versus group aggregates. And where the characteristics just don’t add up because they do. As in:

  • Elections. Every vote counts, but no single one matters.
  • ‘Democratic’ (quod non) politics in general. Where one can only change things by joining political parties where your particular issue voice is lost, you are required to toe the party line on many (other) things against your ad hoc will and purpose, and parties end up not representing anyone in particular – no party has exactly all opinions right on all your issues, and in the end even parties don’t do as promised because they have to compromise.
  • Organizations. Where group think (is the) rule(s). Where all collectively are expected to behave individually. Or so. At the end of this.
  • Statistics. Where n times the average of n data points is nowhere the same as any of the data points. The statistician drowned in the river that is 1 ft deep on average. The average human has 1 nipple and 1 ball. Etc. [Let alone causality that is only implied in the human discourse, the Story, but has never yet been proven to exist. Philosophers’ stuff]
  • Mathematics (I). Where the greatest common divisor decreases rapidly as the number of elements increases.
  • Mathematics (II). Where there is a continuity ‘correction’ when jumping from discrete to real arithmetic.

But now, first, your pic of the day:
DSCN1315
[Also Girona, oft missed]

Which all reminds us of Ortega y Gasset’s rants against the hordes, the masses – his their Revolt is the fear of the shrinking greatest common divisor.

Which also reminds us of the perennial individual versus history movements when discussing innovation. One can go it alone but will not gain traction. Or (later) succumb to the pressure of joining others but losing something for the sake of being allowed to join. Hmmm, I feel there’s much more to be said here. But the bits margin on this blog did just not suffice. To be continued. In the mean time, I’d welcome your contributions to the above list …

Maslow for companies

Some first sketches of an idea that sprang to mind during some musings about (the feasibility of) schemes that classify maturity levels for companies, or organisations. The idea being that the common Maslow pyramid that, despite some critique here and there that usually points at critics’ misunderstanding of modeling and this model in particular, is still very much valid for establishment of personal preferences and comfort zones.
* Yes I do know the cultural variance in ‘it’.

But the idea quickly stalled due to lack of progress in the bottom layers of the OrgPsyPyramid – what comes first for e.g., start-ups; is that different for established organisations that are under threat of extinction due to disruptors and/or self-inflicted financial troubles ..? Is it market share (these days, a.k.a. active users), growth for growth sake, immediate positive cash flow (or the opposite; burn rate as a plume à l’honneur), or ..?

Hm, it’s time for:
DSCN5042[Tok’about old (?) and new classics]

The other layers, … will follow in a couple of weeks. Think traditional growth, market share, capitalization (or valuation), profits, foundation for longevity. But as we move up higher, as to be expected we’re entering the harder-to-understand regions, being the harder to define, implement and achieve ones too. If you would have some pointers to science already having been done; yes please I’d be happy to incorporate that. So, looking forward to your comments… (as if anyone would comment…)

Maverisk / Étoiles du Nord