I'm watching a docudrama about the "911" [whatever you want
to call it].
They explain that U.S. and Canadian air-traffic controllers brought
over 500 [5,000?] planes down with over 1,000,000 passengers
in about 3 hours, with (obviously) no mishaps, *with no predefined
plan*.
So, afterwards, "they" decide to figure out aplan in case U.S.
airspace needs to be cleared ever again. The planning group
decided *not* to promulgate a specific plan, because they felt it would
hinder the air controllers' ability to handle the situation.
I know this is not quite the same, but it sort of
reminds me of the time, in IBM, when
I was put on a very high priority must-be-done-right
project with just a very few other persons (there
was little or no coordination -- each of us had his or her
assignment, and it all had to work together -- it was
a small but "high business priority" kludge to make
IBM's then most powerful computer able to
run enough work to be marketable). When the
project was successfully over, I was told it was
one of the most error-free things the site had done in recent
memory. I asked why they didn't take it as a "model",
and the response was: "that project was an exception".
Or, as I would propose to reword it: That project was so
important and time-critical that they could not afford
to do the job "the right way"....
\brad mccormic
--
Let your light so shine before men,
that they may see your good works.... (Matt 5:16)
Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thes 5:21)
<![%THINK;[SGML+APL]]> Brad McCormick, Ed.D. / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Visit my website ==> http://www.users.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
