83,240
edits
Template:M intro design System redundancy: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Template:M intro design System redundancy (view source)
Revision as of 09:37, 18 July 2023
, 18 July 2023no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Forty years in the thrall of [[High modernism|high-modernist]] management | |||
Beliefs: management of a distributed organisation is best controlled from the centre, horizontally and from the the top, vertically. This is the standpoint with the best view of all the data pertaining to the business as a whole. | |||
Materialist view: all relevant information about an organisation can be articulated as data. | |||
With enough data everything about the existing organisation can be known. If one’s current status is fully known, one’s future state can be fully predicted. | |||
Even though one inevitably has less than perfect information, extrapolations, mathematical derivations and algorithmic pattern matches from a large but finite data set will have better predictive value than “ineffable expertise”: the learning we have assigned to experienced experts is really a kind of anecdotal folk psychology that has limited analytical rigour: this is the lesson of {{br|Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game}}: in the same way that the Wall Street data crunchers could outperform talent scouts when selecting baseball players, so can models outperform humans in optimising processes. | |||
Since we are overflowing with data, we can therefore programmatise business | |||
Optimising business is some kind of mathematical problem. To the extent we can’t do this, it is simply a function of insufficient data or computing power. | |||
Early pioneers: [[Frederick Winslow Taylor]] | |||
The amount of data and computing power have each grown exponentially in the last twenty years, and this has bolstered (or as likely papered over growing cracks in) the high modernist ideology | |||
[[Taylorism]] and just-in-time efficiency | |||
=== It’s the long run, stupid=== | === It’s the long run, stupid=== | ||
A snapshot of the process, when it is at minimum stress, fair weather, all is operating well. But efficiency must be measured over an appropriate life cycle measured by the frequency of the worst possible negative event. The efficiency of a process must take in ''all'' parts of the cycle — the whole gamut of the four seasons — not just that nice day in July when all seems fabulous with the world. There will be other days; difficult ones, on which where multiple unrelated components fail at the same moment, or where the market drops, clients blow up, or tastes gradually change. There will be almost imperceptible, secular changes in the market which will demand products be refreshed, replaced, updated, reconfigured; opportunities and challenges will arise which must be met: your window for measuring who and what is ''truly'' redundant in your organisation must be long enough to capture all of those slow-burning, infrequent things. | A snapshot of the process, when it is at minimum stress, fair weather, all is operating well. But efficiency must be measured over an appropriate life cycle measured by the frequency of the worst possible negative event. The efficiency of a process must take in ''all'' parts of the cycle — the whole gamut of the four seasons — not just that nice day in July when all seems fabulous with the world. There will be other days; difficult ones, on which where multiple unrelated components fail at the same moment, or where the market drops, clients blow up, or tastes gradually change. There will be almost imperceptible, secular changes in the market which will demand products be refreshed, replaced, updated, reconfigured; opportunities and challenges will arise which must be met: your window for measuring who and what is ''truly'' redundant in your organisation must be long enough to capture all of those slow-burning, infrequent things. | ||