http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-Mff23hgidqmHGqbcv.lfskakEtS6qLVHUEMFUG4-?cq=1&p=125

The important point is that, even if the customer sees through the fiction, the fiction is intended more for the shareholders, since, at the end of the day, the price of the shares is a speculation that can be just as easily driven by fictions as by the “hard data” on the books. In other words the fictions become the tail that wags the dog, which is why the movie of that name was so aptly titled!

The author of the detective novels, btw, is Batya Gur; Michael Ohayon is her character.

I was looking forward to meeting you at the Retreat, above all, because I wanted to introduce you to a startup I’m involved with — you have worked closely, I know, with my friends at SocialText, and I rather think this will interest you extremely. In place of my spamming your blog, will you very kindly drop me an email when you have a chance?

I know, I was meant to be at Jerry’s Retreat, but life has been somewhat hectic for me these past few months…..

An Irish Airman Foresees His Death

I know that I shall meet my fate
Somewhere among the clouds above:
Those that I fight I do not hate,
Those that I guard I do not love:
My country is Kiltartan Cross,
My countrymen Kiltartan’s poor,
No likely end could bring them loss
Or leave them happier than before.
Nor law, nor duty bade me fight,
Nor public men, nor cheering crowds,
A lonely impulse of delight
Drove to this tumult in the clouds;
I balanced all, brought all to mind,
The years to come seemed waste of breath,
A waste of breath the years behind
In balance with this life, this death.

Indeed, a brittle formatting system is a good stalking horse for a brittle engineering system.

The relationship in which a person promises to pay more than he has to someone who promises to deliver more than he can is not a new kind of problem and not specific either to technology nor even to exchange.

But, I fail to see how it is ‘post-modern,’ ala Stephen Smoliar’s comment.

http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2006/10/15/continuing-with-musing-on-project-management-and-communication/#comment-11866

The heart of my advocacy revolves around the idea that participatory design is ultimately all about ONGOING CONVERSATIONS that need to be enabled through the entire development process. At the very least those conversations need to involve both producers and consumers, and there is nothing like a good conversation to blur the categorical boundaries that are imposed upon us! Should shareholders also be included in those conversations? Perhaps that is not a bad idea. My guess is that many (most?) shareholders give very little thought to the customers of the businesses in which they invest; and, for that matter, they probably give more thought to the financial reports than they do from any accounts of what is actually happening “on the shop floor” (metaphorically speaking). So, to the extent that shareholders could achieve a better understanding of how business is actually conducted, includion in the conversation would be a good thing. Nevertheless, there is probably a risk that shareholders too interested in quarterly returns could disrupt conversations between producers and consumers that arise when things are not going according to plan. I suspect that, once again, it all comes down to governance. There is no doubting the value of the conversations, but there is no ignoring that they need to be properly managed in such a way that all engaged interests are honored.

You have all given me food for thought for another post.