Blog archive Knowledge and information Technical development General Site updates Articles Opinions Quotes Reviews Work and technology Ego ergo sum About this site
Fri, 20 August 2004 13:00:00 GMT
Losing it ... again.
Hi. My name is Alex, and I'm sick of it all. I am an angered and bitter individual, full of bile and threats of vengance. Oh hear my lament;
Why must "processes" and "business analysis" be the beakon of shining light through the fog of "enterprise" development? We throw ourselves into situations where we must collect "user requirements", demonstrate to the "project investors" that our "business objective" is met by our "specifications." The "management process group" lead by the "chief superindendant technical officer" needs "milestone reports" and "board reports" (that of course also needs to go to the "steering board") so that their "ongoing work processes can be adjusted." Fun stuff like that.
Maybe it's just me not grasping how the world works or something, but this incredibly strong focus on anti-human parlance and functionality is so darn wrong! It is why usable design processes (See! I just did it again!) appealed to me in the first place; getting away from a hierarchical description of processes ('The implicating supervisor for this process of structured governance reports to the requirements specifyer on specific events of process control.') for simple stuff that really amounts to "Send Bob an email when its done".
Now don't get me wrong; I understand the value of templates and explanations of "how we do things around 'here" - even a processing workflow (Dangit!) - but I do not understand why the people making these templates and explanations whinge because people don't use them, or don't use them fully, or wrongly, or slightly right but not right enough, or don't understand them, or don't like them, or don't want them, or - like me - don't grasp what they're trying to say, or whatever criteria a failed process or project or company gets. Ah yes, the abstractions and the objectivism should make things arbitrary and straight to the point, deliciously logic and fit for breaking any fuzzy human thing down to machine parts to be easily assembled by low-skilled assemblers, ... but they don't! They never will! Humans are terribly good at not being logic, at not wanting to be treated as a piece of factory assemblers. In fact, we rebel against it, we hate it, and do things oppositely in shere protest. It is why these big machines are known for their slowness.
And yet we embrace this practice further! As I said, I'm sick of it all, because this is a management aspect I've seen all my life, faught against and tried to change, without much success, even when said management knows and admits it "isn't the best thing to do, but what else can we do?" The mind boggles; How about "Something else?" Anything will do. Try something new; treat the former processes as you would treat a person you like. Treat the former project specifications as a dinner you're holding for friends. Make it personal. Make it more human. Make it so that humans won't rebel against the core of the ideas you're trying to push.
End of bile. Yes, yes, some do it differently, but somehow they seem to be small companies where there are fewer cooks. Where is the benevolent dictator when you need him?Permalink (Fri, 20 August 2004 13:00:00 GMT)| Comments (11) | General
"Sarchasm: The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person who doesn't get it."
My other blog
Goodies from the archives
Blogs I read
Column Two (hot)
Don Park's Daily Habit (hot)
Edd Dumbill (hot)
Guide to Ease (pause)
Scripting News (hot)
Silent Lucidity (balance)
The Bile Blog (hot)
Signal vs noise (hot)
Thought Horizon (hot)