Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Links for 2007-11-27
In many professional businesses, high technical excellence is taken for granted - we assume that having it is "table stakes" for competing. However, it's not a trivial issue to ask whether and how an enterprise goes about ensuring that its employees in fact meet high standards of technical expertise.
We shouldn't throw daggers at software vendors but instead should focus on enterprise architects who exercise their right to remain silent.
So, what are your thoughts on Business Process Management and Security?
Many IT projects fail because participants don’t take steps to fix seemingly-obvious problems. This statistic, if true, means a significant number of companies will experience serious IT failure because they didn’t follow simple, common sense policies.
I sure would love to get my hands on the same statistics for GE, Oracle and Intel
When you were just learning to write the alphabets, all you had to do to get an applause from people around you was to write the alphabets correctly. Those were the rules of the game. When you moved to school, the rules changed almost without notice. You could not get an applause just by reciting or writing the alphabets. The same phenomema is also occuring in corporate America.
Something that practitioners of enterprise architecture need to noodle.
Given a list of performance objectives for a task, the training objectives for the task can be developed. The training objective states the expected performance of the individual at the end of training.
I wonder how Security Monkey, Shawn Rohrbach, Tom Olzak, Dave Keays, Abhishek Singh, Mark Tordoff, Brock Frary, Vic Bhatia, Lou Bolanis and Lee Whitfield would classify themselves using this definition?
Links to this post: