Changing culture, individually

The thing about changing organisations’ culture(s) seems to never be solved. As new waves of organisational-cultural ideals surface continuously, as if they would even be allowed into a corner of shadow of actual cultural ideals.
The thing about … these org-changes-to-(never-will)-be is that they either focus on the org as one wholistic [just adapt your spell checker to the Truth wh is correct, here] thing to conquer, or on the rightsizing of all required change to … subdepartment level. By the time one arrives at the latter, qua project management, all (momentum) has been lost already. And, it is taking it not far enough … To be really effective, wouldn’t the change have to hook into individuals’ individual time-variant circumstances, to come at the right time, with the right dose, in the right direction? Meaning you’ll have to aim and plan in three dimensions for every fte. A bit much. However traditional-waterfall or now-already-traditional agile your project management, you’ll fail.

Cultural change … another social phenomenon that will, like implementation of societal ideals, start to waiver and in the end bring havoc to itself when implemented beyond halfway of reaching its end stage. Like all political Utopias; once implementation is begun, failure sets in. Like a sinoid function, but with inflation correction to be included. And, let’s remember that Toynbee already pointed out, correctly (other than his delusional opinion on British superiority even at the cost of not seeing others’ contributions at all let alone in their right valuation, and ever so wrongly), that the Utopias were for the dominant minorities only. All others pay not cash but dearly. Same, for organisational-cultural ideals ..?

The only way out, is Schumpeterian it seems.


[Another utterly unrelated pic just to throw you off a little. Again, where?]

Homing in on the Homard

No, I meant locking on the lobster.

Like, what you get when a radar installation has a chicken flying too close in: Instant roast chicken. Yes my dear friends that’s how the microwave came to be invented: The observation that for humans, too, a picket line needs to be drawn around (mobile) radar installations or you get a headache or worse. Not as much a brain freeze but a brain fry.

Which is all OK. But what about microwaving a lobster? Apart from ‘slowly’ boiling it, or wrecking it with a knife, how would toasting one at a suitable wattage work ..?
For one, one needs a big microwave. No quinoa (“Keen-(oh)wah” not “Kee-no!-wah”, please?) in a little [size, not person-referring] midget crockpot size, but full Nova Scotia size.
For another, cook time ..? Food size comparison may help a little but … soft-skin rabbit with sturdy meat is not relevant for hard-shell/many-extremities / soft meat jumbos.

But for thirds, the main question: Will it both improve taste (as the cook time is probably short and intense, non-dilutional if that’s a word), and will it at the same time be more humane than either alternatives ..?

If, hopefully, so, why wait? Hope to hear soon from someone that experimented, and succeeded.

Now, the only thing left, is to find a way to get those NS lobsters further afield fresh and alive, much further than seems feasible today. I happen to know perfect accompagnements

Now we’re at the subject … Has anyone tried their hand on robot fishing – f not ph – like, when you see sea exploration they have these nimble boxes with robot arms, that are either latched to a set of cables including for remote control. Now a) have they been made autonomous qua power et al., b) have they been made autonomous per se..? Because nowadays, fishermen [LBGTQ-invariant, are they?] still go out to sea on their little boats (hey, just compare the boat size to the ocean) whereas it would be better if (I of course mean the bottom dwelling lobster) fishing would be done from the harbour / oceanview shack/house, remotely controlling the collection of nets/cages [unsure what the f’mens’ lingo is for these things] with all the fine catch. Or go for Deinopsis fishing.
So, is this done like this, anywhere? Why not spread it? It could save lives of those not needing to go out anymore, in rough and cold conditions, wouldn’t it?


[Raw, but no fish tank. Guess where]

Blockchain Bystanders

Much earlier, I posted on the bystander effect and how that wreaks havoc on open source software reliabilty.
Sadly, I can’t find any reference why the same error wouldn’t bug the ultimate reliability of blockchain systems. Yes, one could check back in the chain, over the oh so widely distributed elements – but does anyone ever do ..?

Hopefully, someone can give me the definitive reprove/couter-proof. Until then, I remain unhappy.

Crazy ones

Here’s the idea: PA*[AI|1] + LC = Continuously adapting administration.

Where
PA is of course Process Analysis, (greatly) enhanced with AI or not,
LC is Low Code, like these guys and gals do,
And the rest, well, when some system finds out on its own when and how to adapt procedures and processes previously baked rock solid into ERP [I mean, accounting] behemoths, it will be perfectly aligned with all the business that takes place out there outside of the system so all the bookkeeping that flows through it, will perfectly reflect actual business done.
All will be happy. Except maybe the accountant(s) that panic [no, certainly not picknick] over their own irrelevance re that all since the system is fully transparent to e.g., stock analysts, for the latters’ own slicing and dicing. Full transparency, taking away agency problems that created accountancy, as an agency problem squared.

You don’t believe me, do you? You think I care, don’t you?

Oh, and:

[Heck, was it this room or the other one ..? Quite a difference; Philly PA]

Cultuur in de Kamer

Dat klinkt zo eng als het is.

Enne, nu de paaseitjes alweer allang in de winkels liggen (jawel), is het wellicht goed te bedenken dat de <titel>-referentie ook pertinent strijdig is met de feiten:

We leven niet in een judeo-christelijke cultuur.

Dit naar aanleiding van de observatie dat de Jumbo(s) op Eerste Kerstdag open waren. En zowat alle andere winkels, de überkapitalistiese, op Tweede. Zondag is ‘erger’ dan wat vroeger een doordeweekse maandag was met sluiting voor inventarisatie. En het gebruik van het nummer van het beest, in plaats van gewone namen van mensen [jawel; alle gevallenen werken en bestaan grotendeels op computers, en nog slechts gedeeltelijk in vlees en bloed] is ook zowat (totalitaire) regel in plaats van uitzondering. Wie de ECB beschouwt, de ultieme machthebbers over de EU [neen, de bewering dat dat de burgers, of eventueel schaamlappig Europese politici of Europarlementariërs zouden zijn, is een simpele leugen], weet waarom de profeet de geldwisselaars uit de tempel verjaagde, als ultiem voorbeeld van duivels moreel verval én ziet dat er van moraliteit in Europa, en dus zeker in Nederland als slijmkeffend schoothondje altijd vooraan, niets over is. Judeo-christelijke cultuur ammehoela.

[Alwaar Das Kapital reeds op de achtergrond opduikt. Eerlijk is eerlijk, tenminste zichtbaar]

Postponing, gratification

Can’t seem to remember; maybe you have some pointers:
Where is the literature on procrastination [beautiful word] where we get outlined what the impact is of

Some things give the satisfaction of Doing, other thing give the satisfaction of Done.

Which is something that crossed my mind. Of course, there’s some element of Doing being satisfactory because one enjoys the learning that goes on, and/or the improvement detected during / due to that, and on the other side the element of Boring that is encountered when the learning isn’t there (routine, rote chores) and only the tick-off at the end signals the job is done hence one’s proud of one’s efforts and gets satisfaction from the very mountain of ill will overcome. Which you now have for having read that sentence. Which was too long.

Z-geenZ-P

Oh wat zijn alle reclamemakers blij dat ze een nieuw speeltje hebben gevonden. De “ZZP’er”.
Die oh zo zelfstandig is, óf een sukkel.

Want, laten we wel wezen:

  1. Een ZZP’er is een zielig type omdat ‘ie zonder personeel z’n (sic) winkel draaiende moet zien te houden en nergens verstand van heeft behalve wat liefde voor z’n producten. Úren staat ‘ie in de winkel te wachten tot er een klant binnen dreigt te komen. Ondertussen moet ‘ie met alles, ja echt álles, eromheen worden geholpen, van KvK-registratie tot en met marketing (kleuterwebsite en ‘SEO’ dude!) en boekhouding maar vooral allereerst van al z’n geld;
  2. Een ZP’er is een Zelfstandig Professional, iemand die geen baasje boven zich nodig heeft om op willekeurig niveau in andere organisaties diensten te leveren – tot en met advies aan de Raad van Commissarissen en Raad van Bestuur, daar opererend op ten minste gelijk en waarschijnlijk hoger niveau van discours anders zou het niet raadgevend zijn. De administratie, ach die is minimaal en eenvoudig. Winkelruimte? Neuh. Gas/licht/water/werkkameraftrek ..? Ach, dat krabbelwerk, laat maar zitten.
  3. Meer smaken zijn er niet. Degenen die ZP’ers uitmaken voor ZZP’ers, zijn toch meestal degenen die zelf wél een baasje boven zich hebben moeten om als loonslaaf te worden gemicromanaged met de schijn (sic) van ontslagbescherming omdat de grote boze wereld anders veel te ingewikkeld en Eng is, en dermate kleingeestig zijn dat ze niet kunnen begrijpen dat anderen er anders over kunnen denken.
    Dat er zo veel geduwd wordt tegen ZP’ers, is niet omdat er zo velen zijn die in schijnconstructies hangen want als die er niet (zouden) zijn, zouden wel vele andere, duisterder, wegen gevinden worden om mensen te lozen; da’s van alle tijden, blijkt. Maar het is uit jaloezie, uit het instinctieve gevoel dat de werkelijke ZP’ers te vrij zijn en niet onder de plak van de ‘vakbeweging’ zitten. Want die laatste is de enige die hard roept, uit (doods)angst slaafse volgers te verliezen voordat via een tussenstapje in de politiek het grote geldgraaien-om-niets (eigenlijk: bij nu eindelijk blijkende volslagen bestuursincompetentie) kan beginnen.

Got it ..?
En ja, type 1 verdient bescherming – maar niet met, zeer zeker eerder tégen, een minder dan halfbakken alternatief voor of terugkeer naar de VAR-chaos/nog-niet-eens-schijn-oplossing.
En type 2 heeft daar sowieso een behoefte aan die, naar boven afgerond, veel kleiner dan nul komma nul is.

Kappen dus, met dat gezZp. Tijd dat hét-scheldwoord-van-2017 wordt vervangen door iets doeltreffends.

Mo’nay part II

What if all those bizarre apps / functionality that provide all sorts of payment services, are all attempts, in vain, to restore some functionality that cash had-has ..?

Because all those micropayment stuff, is used mostly if at all for payments in close physical proximity (or just take the effort to… afraid of human closeness are you ..!?) that just cash money was perfect for.
And now we have a chaos of new apps and banking app functionality that solves all those payment problems that you didn’t realise you seriously had and don’t want to clutter over the edge your phones with, in a garbled attempt to fix what we seem to almost have lost, multiple apps per one issue re-solved with much less quality at a time. By, mostly, banks or splinters that will (ahead-of-time absolute fact) fall into the hands of banks, trying to capture your life – all of your value exchanges which for them, is your life but certainly is your panopticon.

Or just admit the great nonsense of it all, Not all that is, and works perfectly, needs disruption. If you think that, no wonder you try (everything) to get your hands on some.

Maverisk / Étoiles du Nord