Reaching A Technological Frontier Entails Breaking Rules Part 2 -- Small Businesses Discussion Forum

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, [4], 5, 6 ]

Subject: Reaching A Technological Frontier Entails Breaking Rules Part 2

Author:
Dennis S. Vogel

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 16:58:10 01/23/12 Mon
In reply to: Clouseau 's message, "What do These Clue mean?" on 21:14:30 01/21/12 Sat

(Note: I put - into special-ist because without -, the forum system won't allow it. It's a free service. I don't expect perfection.)

This is my interpretation:
Rules set boundaries. The rules referred to in this book are based on work by people who specialize in the knowledge & skills of their careers & fields of study.

Until somebody reaches the edges/boundaries of the technological frontier, the knowledgeable & skilled special-ists don't know the extent of what's possible.

To some extent, we don't know where impossibility really starts. It's a point at which something is/becomes impossible to do. Moore's Law is used as an example in "Seeing What's Next". There's a limit somewhere to how small transistors & silicon wafers can be & still be functional. Doubling the total transistors on smaller chips is probably something nano-technology couldn't do forever.

Michael Kanellos, editor at large at CNET News.com, wrote, "The laws of physics will likely begin to slow down the pace of Moore's Law over the next decade. Ultimately, the rule may have to be looked on as a generalized guidepost for performance improvement. Progress, meanwhile, will come more from better system design than from increases in transistors."

Diminishing returns eventually leads to a point where the impossibility of a task starts getting closer. It would seem to be where possibility ends (beyond which something is possible).

Technically, impossibility for anything is a fixed point & possibility ends there.

Yet, how many things have been made/done that were supposedly impossible. I realize with limits on technology something may be hard to reach in the present. Thinking something is impossible means that belief becomes a self-imposed limit. If no progress beyond the current level is possible, why bother trying to push the limits?

When people think something is possible (or at least, could be possible) they're more inspired than any who believe they can't go any farther.
For clarity (I hope), I'll use the term 'technician' to mean people who have vital knowledge & skills in their career field, but technicians don't have as much proficiency as special-ists.

special-ists codify problems & solutions to the extent somebody can study the codes/rules & achieve desired results. Technicians use those codes/rules to solve problems they were previously unqualified to attempt.

Interdependencies can be used to produce or increase synergies. Linking processes internally &/or externally in a supply chain can use resources more effectively & efficiently.

When a business or part of a firm is modular, it's usually stable until big changes are made. Configuring anything that's modular has a risk of instability. Yet without changing, a business is apt to stay where the money (lucrative profit) isn't. When supply & demand change lucrative profits could be available where the money used to be. But even then, changes will be required to be in the right market position.

Often when interdependencies are required, it's when big changes are necessary to adapt to new market conditions. Big changes can be chaotic, especially when processes are changed, because processes are supposed to produce consistent results. Changing processes changes results or at least how results are produced.

To have some control over the changes, businesses need people who have as much applicable knowledge & skill as they can find. These people tend to be special-ists ("experts").

In a changing environment highly experienced special-ists may confront issues they haven't dealt with before. Some issues may be similar to what they've experienced, yet they shouldn't assume what worked in the past will work just as well in the present or future.

To be successful, these special-ists need to be more than very knowledgeable, highly experienced & skilled. They need applicable creativity to adapt to new situations & adapt their nascent processes as they discover what works well. When an action doesn't produce an expected result, that should be a learning experience.

When something they test almost works, they need to determine whether to test a different version or start completely over to get a dissimilar result. Something that's dissimilar can cause unanticipated positive or negative effects.

Interdependencies can be used to create & increase synergies, if they're managed well.
This analogy won't thoroughly accurately define interdependencies & modularities, so please don't take it too literally or personally.

Interdependencies can be like puppies, they need supervision (but they'll never admit it). But even if you watch them closely, you should watch where you step.
Puppies create & increase synergies, among other things. The effect of adding another puppy isn't just a case of 1 + 1 = 2. 2 puppies seem like more 6.

So, if you add a 2nd puppy, you should recruit 20 more people to try to control them (Good Luck with that). Why 20? Because nobody ever controls a puppy for more than a few seconds, if another puppy is nearby.

You & the 3 people, who were foolish enough to be recruited, are modularities (the other 17 are smarter, so they refused). The puppies are interdependencies. This is why interdependencies should be surrounded by modularities.

Since you adopted 2 puppies & because you watched an hour long TV show about puppies, you are the special-ist. The other person who tries to help you is a technician. Why do you only have 1 technician? Because the other recruits got smart kind of quickly (a bit late, but quickly) & left.

What qualifies the fool, who didn't quit, as a technician? S/he watched you clean up a puppy puddle & a puppy pile. That's what you need a technician for. Why do you think the others quit?

Let's take a break from learning now. Your technician looks tired. OOPS! Don't step th... I tried to warn you!

I know I didn't answer each of your questions yet. Please, be patient. I'm a special-ist, not a ... Oh No! Now what did I step in?

Dennis S. Vogel
Successful marketing depends on doing the right
things in the right ways at the right times.
It's what you need to do to show you have a clue.
Please click here for free information.
http://www.lakefield.net/~thrivingbusiness/

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Subject	Author	Date
Why Don't These Clues Work?	Dennis S. Vogel	00:06:40 06/01/12 Fri