ERM, GRC – Page 48 – Maverisk / Étoiles du Nord

3+ bodies found in business

… just about everywhere. Of course I refer to the n-body problem set with n > 3 as here.
Because it is so dismally known, and applied. Most starkly (#loveofwords) in ‘business’ ‘strategy’, where the lack of wisdom is clearly demonstrated in the lack of inclusion of all (sic) potential (sic; including chance function estimations) competitors’ moves. Name any market where the latter s doesn’t apply, and report it to (anti-?)cartel authorities.

I.e., the Problem applied to strategy means: Strategising is futile, all your course belong to us. On a side note:

[Alignment; Vienna]

Critical management, not governance

Ah, there’s another authoritative source with a description how leadership and (‘actual’) management should be.
I.e., not the robotic, stupid (when one would be offended, consider this a. reflecting your own insecurity out of gut feeling that it describes you, b. intended, c. still being the most lapidary labelling) totalitarian-bureaucratic ‘governance’ type of ‘control’ (quod non, and this) but actual effective, results-achieving teaming. Like what firms originally were invented for.

OK, just resting my case again. Plus:
DSCN7735
[Some parading, but in operation, stealthy over pomp; Baltimore]

Musk / Vicarious / ASI

Haven’t heard in a while of anything fruitful coming forward from Elon Musk’s investments in Vicarious despite his concerns. (Now that DeepMind has gone over to the Dark Side.)

Reasons ..? Double secrets?
I’d just like to know.

For the weekend:
DSCN8447
[Algorithmic justice prevails ..? Amsterdam]

Simple link: BYOD is the New Wi-Fi

Very true. Though we may even say: BYOD was the new WiFi, as BYOD is so 2013 … but let’s await the resurrection of WiFi when IoT-in-the-shape-of-ubiquitous-computing takes off…
BYOD is the New Wi-Fi – Infosecurity Magazine.

Will amount to not much

… Was the typical reaction that long (!) time ago when this aired. Which was, statistically, correct I guess. When betting on binary outcomes ( [Huge | Nothing] ) with so skewed a distribution [Intermission: What would the moment-generating function be ..? Could point at some underlying success formula!] of probabilities, the Will Amount To Nothing opinion is quite valid.
But then, when weighing in the possible pay-offs (per distribution, too ..?), the picture is somewhat less clear. But still heavy on the Dismiss side, right ..?

Safe bet:

[May still loose out after tech moved on; Sevilla]

Too Big (to … whatever)

As predicted, ERP has dropped from view in the world of business and/or tech.
Because reasons. Many of which have to do with the bigness of it all; one would really need to have a business so big to be able to capture all advantages of ‘seamless’ integration of systems into one, and not or, have to transform it so completely as to better have built the new one all from scratch (or schlepping in all the parts of the old, into the new mold). Which sort-of defeats the purpose. Completely.

Hence, the demise of ERP (as predicted here) has taken its final form. For now; we expect shrinkage of attention and market share to continue.

This, triggered by yet another laggard attempt i.e., by some government, to implement SAP througout at some Department but failed. Typical cost (overrun): €196M zooming out to €900M which only suffices to salvage some parts that work. Typically, because Reality didn’t seem to want to fit into the ideal mold set out but just went its own way, the way which it was on from before the start. Not even wrecking the project on purpose, just going along and not even noticing the project’s required changes as daily business had better things to do. As it was called: Where (the failure of) makeability [translations manufacturability and engineerability have also been seen in the wild] met reality.

So, no need to resort to Project Governance mumbo-jumbo. Just too big is reality, and:

[Huh? Well, it’s Cyprus Meridien but why ..?]

‘sup, competitor ..?

Oh yes, of course. One couldn’t leave Docker to capture all the market as one understands the power of (being a) monopoly, right ..?
Was the first that crossed my mind when reading this here piece on D’s competitor Rocket. Still backing D, the Big G will now play them against each other ..?

Anyway:

[Wouldn’t life without competition be like this, always ..? Resson, FR]

Pro-nun-ciation

OK.
We already had the CGEIT ~~title~~ certification. Which is pronounced in Dutch as ‘See goat’.
Now let’s add CSX. Pronounced by all as ‘See sex’.

Oh jolly! One is ignorant, XOR one is prepubescent.
Either way, #fail – big time. Let alone for content. This, if you’re still a believer.

You still deserve?

[To be in your stroller; Nancy city park]

Oh, whatev’ – will succeed

Yes, critique hasn’t been overly enthousiastic for the HoloLens developments. Like in this here story.
Question is, though: Did the first iPod have Shuffle? Was the first iPhone even a serious phone ..? [Or was that the first iPad that had no comms; I forget due to irrelevance. But do notice how there’s now a continuum of screen sizes from smartphone via note and tablet to desktop screenlets and mega-TVs]

My take: It’ll be somewhere on the Glass–to–iPad scale: As prototype that stays (sic! Glass’s still around for very, very effective deployment in some sectors) and/or as lauch of a steep improvement curve.

Which is good. But may bring about some unforeseen consequences: What when Youth gets hooked, and unlearns what Reality is ..? Will we all follow ..?
Yes, if e.g., walls can be presented hologrammatically to a degree that hologrammar-Ns (you read that here, first!) are satisfied with reality resemblence, could an ASI take over and confine us in virtual (now for realz) boxes ..?

Dysto here, dysto there, dysto everywhere… Hence:

[Mockery … Barça]

The Divide(s)

Surely I’m not the only one running up against total resistance (i.e., no discernable millimeter move) when one would want to even discuss disruption in industries hitherto untouched.
Like the financial industry. Really, the mindsets haven’t opened up to the 21st century at all. Despite in-roads by trading algorithms, something some even called a ‘financial crisis’ or so, and Bitcoin i.e. block chain trust.
But hey, at some point you just want some everyone to have their Kodak moment, right ..?

Maybe there’s three kinds of people:

The kind that embraces the New for what it is and brings; the innovators of course and the early adoptors. Ballpark: 10%
The early and late majority that tag along because everybody is doing it. About 60-70%.
The Laggerds, the retards (qua brain openness and movement…), the reactionary. The remainder 30-20%.

That’s not new. But the percentages may be different for various kinds of innovations and disruptions. The point being: How do you know where you are, if you’re in the third category and/or before the disruption strikes ..?
Yes, I do understand the flip at the other extreme, where Morozov–like second thoughs about what We as a global society would want. But that’s way beyond the frightened closure of mind that shrinks and shrinks consciousness (both meanings) ever further. Where you’d want to, metaphorically hey keep it real, bang someone’s head against the proverbial beamer display to make ’em see – with the contrary effect of disliking anything New even further in turn…

But OK. This was just an extensive RT of the LinkedIn link above… So, herewith:
DSCN2513
[Still standing (? as ‘t Schip), but gloom!]