Tag: expired

Nothing as powerful as ill-guided over the top Lean (i.e.) self-destruction

Where Lean creates its own calcification — compared to, and evoking, its Schumpeterian nemesis the long tail start-up disruptors sphere of true customer service.
Because, think of it: Lean is about reducing the handling of variance, of inputs, processing, and outputs. But nobody wants ever less adapted products. The Makers‘ Movement is on its way for a reason..! No-one cares for the hyper-efficient execution of ever more useless processes. Oh fine that you’re doing things so six black belt’y sigma-less (sic); nobody will give you a cent for it. As your value would be in the opposite: The attention to each and every individual quirkiness. Ecce homo idolaticus, ecce shrinking spiral, ecce dull prophets …

Just wanted to share this insight, though. And:
DSC_0749
[Verrry much unfinished business… ’15 DC]

How to Not Authentic

Oh how Ecce Homo it is … In the search for authenticity, exposing one’s pathetically empty on that subject. Of course, referring to this here column on the desperation of searching the real deal — that straight away exposes itself as not the thing by definition through having to search for it.
But then, probably part of the still-bearded class. Too young (mentally) to know what real retro is (about), only just too old to envy One D…

Wryly smiling … And:
DSCN2963
[If you know where / what that is: The actually authentic… (?)]

Fun / stagnation

About the difference between boring and Inspirational! in business.

Old New
Process, procedures, work steps Request for direction
Compliance Demonstrating failure; to learn
Punishment for (anyone’s! esp. higher-ups’) failures Coaching towards more errors
Stepping out of line (even by casual remarks hinting at less than 100% drone motivation) is failure Pivoting (even for your contribution) is near-mandatory
Succes is obedience to the gallows Success is coming up with / doing the hitherto infeasible, unthinkable
The ones exploiting drones (licking up / kicking down) and (only) best versed at sticking to their chair, are promoted Promotion? We don’t do rank and file here; we like your creative more or less
You’re fired – just because you’re a number that turned up in the lottery – that’s held every couple of months because bosses are bored and utterly incapable of coming up with anything revenue-increasing i.s.o. cutting costs and shrinking is growing, right? Even when the shrinking cuts out exactly the very growth-enhancing competences you need ever more desparate. You’re allowed to pursue a career elsewhere, too but we don’t want to lose you. What can we do to make you like it even more here?
“(The ‘innovator’s dilemma’ is that ‘doing the right thing is the wrong thing.’) As Christensen saw it, the problem was the velocity of history, and it wasn’t so much a problem as a missed opportunity, like a plane that takes off without you, except that you didn’t even know there was a plane, and had wandered onto the airfield, which you thought was a meadow, and the plane ran you over during takeoff.” (as here; very instructive) The same.
Fade to grey “I’m Cool”

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:
DSCN0447
[Alignment; Vienna]

Meet no more, continuously, and excel

I posted before on the atrocities of current-day meeting practices. And on the changing role of the Document, here.
The latter, provided some thought towards predicting the demise of the former: When we’re connected (at the information level, not mere technically) constantly and continuously, wouldn’t all the errors of meetings be resolved (resolvable) by not having them anymore, or at least, re-styling them in a wholesale manner?
First, a picture:
[Reflections of – the way life used to be (lyrics)]

I mean, all the meeting errors have been allowed to play out because the in-charge’s liked them, for the display of faux leadership caricature they provided. But with the change towards always-on mesh communications, which is do-or-die, the very reasons to have meetings diminishes. Social advantages of meeting F2F, that were collateral ‘damage’, may still be around but in the form of having drinks. Who’d need more? and now recognize the benefits outright, without the formal hassle and hilarious chair and topper pomp.

Though I treasure the value of the Document, if, very big if, it is in itself an attempt to Masterpiece. Which it sometimes is, in organisations, but then, so desperately few would survive public muster. Yes, there’s a trend towards deployment of Narratives everywhere. But that’s not what I mean here. I mean stuff like Books, nuggets of Culture carried through the ages. Where mere documents, even, let alone casual socmed conversations, will leave no (! storage re-use needs, TLA?) trace of your existence. As the Greek Hell beyond the underworld: In the underworld, even the villains were still known by name. But beyond that, in Hell, wailed the spirits of the Forgotten, the nameless. That truly was as bad as hell could get. And, of course, true heroes would attach to the pantheon, become stars and constellations. Do you strive for that, when filling out the TPS report at Initech? If you had to look that up, you’re on the naïve side of young…

Well then, to summarise: Meeting mania is curable, and Documents sharpen our skills. What a blunt conclusion. But don’t blame me when your greatness takes off.

Spam (out) of control

How is it that for decades, we had been used to managerial spans of control being in the 5-to-10, optimal (sic) 8 range, whereas what we had in the past couple of decades is spans of control in the 2-3 range mostly ..? [Duh, exceptions and successful organisations aside…]

Because I came across some post on a well-known business site where there’s an early simple statement that a span of control of 10 would not only be normal, but outdated as well, as the span could be at 30.
Well, I doubt the latter, as this would conflict with a lower ‘Dunbar’ number which indeed is about 8, with ramifications for informal control as outlined in this Bruce masterpiece. Oh yes now it springs to mind the 8 figure was taken by the military, the ultimate built-for-survival organization, to be the optimal span of control, and taken over to business for its apparently attractive all-business-is-war metaphor – where the attraction is there only for those not really exposed to the gore of war, I guess.

But whether it’s 8, 10 or 30, the optimal span of control clearly is larger than the common today’s practice.
Which has implications:

  • Too low a number will inevitably lead managers to seek to have something to do. Busywork, in their role leading to excessive micromanagement (yes pleonasm but on purpose) and/or excessive meeting behavior, in particular with their underlings and/or likewise trapped colleagues, like an AA group. Thus burdening the underlings with time taken away from actual content work and the need for Action item lists and reporting blub. Thus burdening colleagues with all sorts of time lost on, what actually is, whining.
  • Too low a number and the micromanagement leads to extreme (far overextended) controls burdens on the ones who’d actually produce anything of value instead of producing negative value with all their externalities like managers may commonly do. This burdening then leads to ‘process’, ‘procedures’ etc., to ‘standardise’ (otherwise, understanding of actual content would be required; the horror to managers!), hollowing out even further the value of any work done. As in the abovementioned / linked Forbes article; the Peter principle will reign.
  • Too low a number and the standardisation will drive out the creativity (in process and in product/service design/production/delivery) that is required ever more than before to counter the ever more changing environment. As I typed this, this article arrived…

So yes, we all need to focus on upping the number. To counter stalemates. To counter bureaucracy heavens. To regain flexibility.
But still, still, this could only work IF, very very big IF, ‘managers’ (not to address actual managers, that I value enormously!) can loosen their frantic, fear-of-death-like Totalitarian Control attitude.
Which I doubt. But then, organisations relying on these (whether already or after they will have crowded-out the actual managers via the Peter principle and acolyte behavior) will loose out to the upstarts that do keep the mold out.

And, finally, of course:
DSCN1138[Was safe, now the highway passes by somewhere down below, leaving the ‘secured’ stranded upon high; Carmona]

Steve and Tim went up the hill…

Aren’t recent developments around, through, by the brand just an amusing (?) sign of the times – the times being the same as ever: A (single?) sinus wave (or multiple smaller ones, stacked on a larger one (bigger wavelength and amplitude); wavelets sales) –, as in this piece and this one ..?

As the latter quotes: “This is not [irrelevant reference to a musicological drama; ed.], and should instead be remembered primarily as a monumental blunder by the tech industry.”
to which:

But the details aside, why didn’t many enough see this coming? Why did anyone expect continued excellence from any company, in particular one so hyped, so turned into a dangerous cult already ..? Whereas so far, every co has demonstrated to have a serious Best Before / use By / Sell By issue. Except the rare exceptions, noted for the exceptionality.
As in:

Adn also don’t forget these twelve wineries… Yes some are so common and/or famed still that you wouldn’t think they’d be so old and still be in the same line of business… [Thanks Wine Turtle for the post]

So, the expectance that something(s; probably multiple, of varying error sizes and (distinct) impacts) might go wrong in any near future, would have had to be raised already, and rise still further. Note that through fuzzy logic, this isn’t offset I think by lowered probabilities of doing things well…! This is just how fuzzy (business) logic works, sometimes…
[Edited to add: And then we find this… Strangely not built into the corp system]

So, Steve and Tim went up the hill to have their little fun, then Tim forgot by taking the blue pill and now…

DSCN2435[What a once great name … Reims. Yeah, look it up, I’m not going to spell it out for you]

Old mass education

Everyone under 18, and anyone 18 and older, needs a massive re-schooling in all things new.
Yes that includes the savants that can hack (99,9% of which is just script kiddies, more on that below), and it includes those that may be slow learners due to age.

But first, a picture:
DSCN9832[Pfanner, Lucca]

The subjects to mass re-school for:

  • Programming of all sorts. Not just CSS/HTML. Also, perl/PHP, SQL, C, Prolog, etc. Etc. Etc. From fundamentals (yes indeed) all the way to slick quasi-savvy app programming. To know what’s under the hood, to be able to work in the field, at all ages to one’s level.
    Oh, and let’s not forget all would need to know how to configure a network, and how to secure it.
  • Design, that is such an important part of Making things these days.
  • IoT and 3D printing (see the previous ones coming together?), for the future; to be able to navigate and play an active role. Otherwise, masses get isolated and out of anything resembling jobs. If you can’t operate in tomorrow’s society, if you can’t do anything worth a living wage, you’ll be cast out.
  • Ethics and sociology, in particular re privacy, the coming Singularity, and World problems like global warming, waste and environmental destruction, and resource depletion. Whether by Augmented Humanity or full humanity oblivion, the future comes to us too fast to first see and then adjust. All now present may NOT defer this to others. You ARE all the others like never before.
  • And all that we know already. All science, humanities, etc. Because schooling has lowered its standards so much. Having more and more (%) in ever ‘higher’ education but teaching less and less. Overall, isn’t coping with society and its complexity the sum total aggregated goal of education ..? Where society has become so much more complex than it was; exponential growth in this one, too has not been dealt with in Ed, on the contrary. Re-creating a plebs. Of all shapes and sizes, including moneyed plebs. The latter seem to rule… I’ll come back to this issue, later. Book by Quote’s pending…

Hey, it’s just a matter of survival beyond mere bare physical needs, for the very near future of all.

And, how to educate all ..?

  • Through gaming, of course
  • Through non-gaming rote learning all the essentials as well. Otherwise, you’ll fail miserably in practice when reality somehow doesn’t quite conform the game show. Which it won’t for decades to come. And no, shallow learning will not work; if only because it’s not learning at all.
  • Through gaining reality experience, of course in the course(s). As application is everything also re turning ratio learning into experience and control.
  • Through in-depth specialisations, to all sorts of levels and breaths. As almost all (except the very, very few script/kit builders) of today’s hackers are script kiddies and the ‘markets’ in that area continue to develop, some knowledge and experience may actually get lost! No, the ‘net does not ‘save’ everything; information production is just too large every day for the storage available globally…
  • All this delivered in traditional classrooms, mixed with MOOCs, mixed with interactive self-learning in class or at home or elsewhere. Which means teachers will have to be re-schooled too, if only because a too large share of them already are backward, too lowly educated (in content) laggerds. As in: VTuIPMt

What a task for society. But if ignored, the amount of ignorance will just be too big for the world to handle. Your comments, please.

Maverisk / Étoiles du Nord