<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Thinking about rules in general</title>
	<atom:link href="http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2008/08/16/thinking-about-rules-in-general/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2008/08/16/thinking-about-rules-in-general/</link>
	<description>a blog about information</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 04:58:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Louis Naugès</title>
		<link>http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2008/08/16/thinking-about-rules-in-general/comment-page-1/#comment-404320</link>
		<dc:creator>Louis Naugès</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Aug 2008 07:51:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://confusedofcalcutta.com/?p=1294#comment-404320</guid>
		<description>Thanks, I like the simplicity of your rules.

I would suggest some changes : 

    If the problem is generic use SaaS or OpenSource

    If the problem is specific to a market segment use commercial OpenSource.

    If the problem is unique to your organisation  build with OpenSource tools.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks, I like the simplicity of your rules.</p>
<p>I would suggest some changes : </p>
<p>    If the problem is generic use SaaS or OpenSource</p>
<p>    If the problem is specific to a market segment use commercial OpenSource.</p>
<p>    If the problem is unique to your organisation  build with OpenSource tools.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: N. Venkatraman</title>
		<link>http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2008/08/16/thinking-about-rules-in-general/comment-page-1/#comment-403998</link>
		<dc:creator>N. Venkatraman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Aug 2008 20:21:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://confusedofcalcutta.com/?p=1294#comment-403998</guid>
		<description>Some are rules; and some are guidelines. Some rules becomes organizational routines and strategic mantras.   Your tripartite classification is similar to what I think about in acquiring capabilities in the network:

A. Capabilities that support the operational infrastructure--Acquire from the market without paying any premium. 

B. Capabilities that are industry-standards--Acquire from top-tier suppliers using aggressive performance contracts.  Do not tolerate competitive weaknesses but do not pay premium here. 

C. Capabilities that drive strategic differentiation--either internal resources or strategic partnerships to accelerate innovation. It is perfectly OK to involve partners as long as the value can be appropriated.   
--
Then, there are two management challenges-- (1) organization-wide recognition and acceptance of the tripartite classification of capabilities and the allcation of resources accordingly; and (2) a systematic process to analyze the dynamic shifts within the tripartite classification , to reclassify capabilities and to change the sourcing routines. 

Rules may be long-lasting but routines to classifiy and source capabilities need to be fine-tuned and adjusted.  Sourcing logics change; partner choices change;  drivers of industry-parity change quickly and enablers of innovation evolve.  

A successful company is one which frames and analyzes itself as a portfolio of capabilities through relationships, not as a portfolio of products or businesses.  Viewed as a portfolio of capabilities through relationships, the enterprise is flexible to transform its business strategy and adapt to the changing requirements.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Some are rules; and some are guidelines. Some rules becomes organizational routines and strategic mantras.   Your tripartite classification is similar to what I think about in acquiring capabilities in the network:</p>
<p>A. Capabilities that support the operational infrastructure&#8211;Acquire from the market without paying any premium. </p>
<p>B. Capabilities that are industry-standards&#8211;Acquire from top-tier suppliers using aggressive performance contracts.  Do not tolerate competitive weaknesses but do not pay premium here. </p>
<p>C. Capabilities that drive strategic differentiation&#8211;either internal resources or strategic partnerships to accelerate innovation. It is perfectly OK to involve partners as long as the value can be appropriated.<br />
&#8211;<br />
Then, there are two management challenges&#8211; (1) organization-wide recognition and acceptance of the tripartite classification of capabilities and the allcation of resources accordingly; and (2) a systematic process to analyze the dynamic shifts within the tripartite classification , to reclassify capabilities and to change the sourcing routines. </p>
<p>Rules may be long-lasting but routines to classifiy and source capabilities need to be fine-tuned and adjusted.  Sourcing logics change; partner choices change;  drivers of industry-parity change quickly and enablers of innovation evolve.  </p>
<p>A successful company is one which frames and analyzes itself as a portfolio of capabilities through relationships, not as a portfolio of products or businesses.  Viewed as a portfolio of capabilities through relationships, the enterprise is flexible to transform its business strategy and adapt to the changing requirements.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gordon Rae</title>
		<link>http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2008/08/16/thinking-about-rules-in-general/comment-page-1/#comment-403878</link>
		<dc:creator>Gordon Rae</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Aug 2008 10:14:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://confusedofcalcutta.com/?p=1294#comment-403878</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve been researching the role of improvisation and routines in business, and have come to the conclusion that following a rule is not a straightforward matter. Your mantra appealed to me, and it started me thinking about gay marriages as a case of the three layers.

40-50 years ago,  governments began to feel that the law ought not to regulate people&#039;s private lives, including sexual morality.   So some generic social rules were removed, including laws 0n homosexuality and attitudes to divorce.

People look to their churches for moral teaching, hence the  Church of England, as the equivalent of an industry, has to reflect on its teachings about sex , and whether it should be positive or negative about gay marriage.

And all of us, as individuals, have to decide what we are prepared to tolerate in our partner,  in contextwhether our partnership is legally recognised, or blessed by the church, or not.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve been researching the role of improvisation and routines in business, and have come to the conclusion that following a rule is not a straightforward matter. Your mantra appealed to me, and it started me thinking about gay marriages as a case of the three layers.</p>
<p>40-50 years ago,  governments began to feel that the law ought not to regulate people&#8217;s private lives, including sexual morality.   So some generic social rules were removed, including laws 0n homosexuality and attitudes to divorce.</p>
<p>People look to their churches for moral teaching, hence the  Church of England, as the equivalent of an industry, has to reflect on its teachings about sex , and whether it should be positive or negative about gay marriage.</p>
<p>And all of us, as individuals, have to decide what we are prepared to tolerate in our partner,  in contextwhether our partnership is legally recognised, or blessed by the church, or not.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Thoughts from the trench - by Prakash Muralidharan &#187; Buy versus build.</title>
		<link>http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2008/08/16/thinking-about-rules-in-general/comment-page-1/#comment-403345</link>
		<dc:creator>Thoughts from the trench - by Prakash Muralidharan &#187; Buy versus build.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Aug 2008 13:56:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://confusedofcalcutta.com/?p=1294#comment-403345</guid>
		<description>[...] proposes the following mantra for buy versus build technology decisions (building something inhouse versus [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] proposes the following mantra for buy versus build technology decisions (building something inhouse versus [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
