Note
On January 16th 2006, as the result of a steward decision regarding his continuing misbehavior following a six week Soft Ban, David Liu was banned from Wiki Wiki Web.
Such decisions are undemocratic, erratic, irrational and inexplicable. They don't benefit Wiki.
If you are new to this site, please do take a detour to New User Pages first. Thanks.
For people interested in Why am I here, or "Still here", the answer lies in an older version of Why Are We All Here.
Higher Principles in need of attention for the moment.
Information Security, in particular Security Management
Community Building does not quite make the Higher Principles, but it is very much related to Change Management. I am not using The Adjunct much at the moment due to time and resource limitations, but I support others to visit the site as it has better Wiki Technology and more use of Real Names.
Therefore, will work on Critical Thinking if there is insufficient community participation later on.
Also, Alternative Jobs For Programmers being considered.
People who want to reach me probably know how to do so via email, or know someone who knows my email. I will be here but focus on different things. -- dl
Discussion in progress will be moved to On David Liu Discussion within a few days, and if no other remarks, then quickDiff (or New Recent Changes) will show information to whoever interested. Response to Dave Voorhis will be moved there as well.
Different things? All your recent activity has related to various management-related pages, but I wondered where you're going with them - you've written a lot, yet seem never to express your own views.
Pages to read later
Dynamic Object Model and the more common name of Adaptive Object Model, and Dot Net implementation example at polelo.cs.up.ac.za 
Positive Engagement (Mine, not written yet)
Agency Problem (or AgencyCost where administrators not induced to acting in interests of owners) vs Moral Hazard (where character / circumstances result in skewed behavior of one of the parties in a contract). Wiki Pedia has both described. related to Governance
Good stuff outside
Carlos Perez on REST, loose coupling, reusability etc. One link at www.manageability.org
David, I didn't attend Jimbo's talk so am not qualified to provide any info about his views on "Social Mechanisms" for wiki. While I'm also interested in "Social Mechanisms" for wiki, I can't afford the time right now to discuss it. Hopefully soon :) -- Brandon Cs Sanders
Hi David,
I thought it appropriate to move this here, since it is really a meta-discussion about the creation of What Is Soa rather than discussion about SOA itself:
Fine. You may have some implementations that claim to be "Service oriented" without use of Xml Web Services. However are you also claiming that it is not worth mentioning XML within your 30,000 ft high-level technical description of SOA? If so, I would like you to invite Costin Cozianu (stated profession of Software Architect) to concur with you on this. -- David Liu, after many days of inactivity following response to GH observations
XML is appropriately mentioned on What Is Soa, albeit in a humorous fashion, and further addressed in more detail under Web Services where it belongs. I see no reason to otherwise sully an accurate, broad, long-term, universal definition with technology de jour, especially as it is not a required component of an SOA. That said, I would certainly not object if someone wished to add content regarding XML or anything else, as long as it is accurate and fits within the context of the page.
As this is a Wiki, and as I rightfully claim no editorial control over What Is Soa or any other except my Home Page, Costin Cozianu is free to alter it as he sees fit. As are you. As is the entire population of the Internet. However, it seems awfully presumptuous of me to explicitly "invite" someone to contribute. That's tantamount to requesting that he or she contribute, and as I am not the boss of anyone here, it is not my place to do so. Indeed, it even seems slightly rude to do so. -- Dave Voorhis <-- for later attention by dl. If DV is reading and cannot wait, pls let me know
Hi David. I am reading, but will happily await a response at your convenience. No rush. -- Dave Voorhis <- Hi Dave, I can give you a "quick incomplete feedback for you to consider". Besides XML (which GH mentioned) I "think" something similar to [loosely coupled systems] "maybe" worth inclusion. I have done lots of readings (and yes lots of MS / others market techure) and that aspect seem to stand out. There could be others. In business terms (easier understood by me) it gets back to "on demand". But I am busy in other "learning and doing" things now and so cannot interact with you in a "considered" fashion. -- dl
Well! As I've mentioned before, I think XML is dealt with in an entirely appropriate and adequate fashion. As for "on demand," I've spent the last twenty-five or so years hearing variations of the underlying sentiment ascribed to everything from COBOL to APL to "PC technology" to Java, so I don't think SOA deserves to be considered "on demand" any more than everything else that's (effectively) been called "on demand." That said, please feel free to include something similar to [loosely coupled systems] on What Is Soa as you see fit. I'll edit it if, and as, I see fit. That's how this here "Wiki" thing works. -- Dave Voorhis <- Dave I have added an external reference that talked about loose coupling, in the Service Oriented Architecture page that I hope is worth your time to wander by. I do not have original information in any technical topics, although I do form views once I have read a few that are not Echo Chambers of each other. -- dl for DV
Hi David. Thanks for the hello. I'll definitely be singing Ruby Languages praises whenever I see the chance. It seems to already have reasonable support in these parts. -- Robbie Carlton Delete When Read
Ian since you are interested in LargeScaleCppSoftwareDesign, do you have thoughts to share on Soa And Loose Coupling? -- dl Nov 05
I would respond the same as Gandhi when asked what he thought of Western Civilization. I think it would be a good idea. -- Ian Osgood
See en.wikipedia.org
'''Is PaulAllen still involved with IT?'''
I have seen an CutterConsortium intro of PaulAllen at http://www.cutter.com/consultants/allenp.html. Is he still active in IT development and application in 2005?
From DealingWithFlames (applying the very principle:)
I have seen this page started off as a Flame Bait, with something in the line of "XYZ...([you should know better]<- something close to that kind of tone).... signed by ABC". In its current form (mid Nov05) the first part has been "refactored". And a miracle appeared. It appear as though ABC started off in making a "considered contribution" and signed it that way.
However it appear to people who know its history as highly hypocritical and therefore I would stick by the much older page of How To React Toa Flame. And suggest other Wiki Readers to merge useful discussions to that page.
-- David Liu
Hi David, if this weren't a homepage, I would put an Implicit Topics tag on it :-) -- .gz
Hi David,
This originally appeared on Dot Net Development Methods and has been (quite rightfully, IMHO) removed, but I still think the question is interesting...
... Nobody cares about developers. -- dl
dl, you consistently paint a grim picture of a development environment in which developers are the lowest slime on the food chain -- seemingly less empowered than part-time janitorial staff -- who neither choose their own tools (the executives, of all people, choose these?) nor does anyone care about them. Please let us know where you work so we can avoid it! -- DV
My response to your "nobody cares about developers" quip was originally meant to be snotty, but I am genuinely curious: Do you really work in an environment where developers are so deprecated, or was "nobody cares..." a bit of colourful hyperbole? -- DV
I am going away for a day or two. It is not appropriate for me to remark on my existing situation. However "Nobody cares" is a Ha Ha Only Serious remark. My experiences are developers get treated best in large software producing firms or academic institutions, or real small shops where the developer makes or breaks the entire IT setup. Anywhere else IT is an expenditure, after Dot Com Bust and YtwokExperiences. You can read similar experiences from "trade press", and even in recent posts by other technical people here at C2.
BTW you can help me get a nuts and bolts person interpret the puzzling SG remark I pasted into the Proxy Pattern. I want to dig deeper as "everyone" is against RPC and remote objects, etc., etc. Thanks -- dl
Mr. David Liu, You are such a busy Bossy Boots about anything you can think of, almost like one of those clever little thingies that are so cute and like to be everywhere. Are you finding this to be an effective tool for your self? I would almost hope so, even though I find it to be an observable waste of effort in some cases. I hope you either make a lot of money for your employers or will do so in the future, for your self. You certainly have a lot of energy and bounciness if nothing else.
Thanks for your unsigned contributions and yes lots of wasted efforts too. Now - any technical topics (e.g. practical stuff in Information Security and/or Interaction Design, query I had outstanding such as those in Proxy Pattern) I can learn from you / your friends contributions here? Category Physics cannot keep my stomach filled. As far as energy, I do not have much left for the next round of Spam infloods. Maybe you can pick up the slack. Delete When Read
Have you got something against Category Physics? Gravity got you down? :-)
BTW I am puzzled by a lot of gnoming activities originating from cable.ubr04.croy.blueyonder.co.uk. A recent example being ContextObjectsAreEvil.
The "activities" were mainly corrections of spelling and punctuation.
I would have preferred if you have given me an opportunity to view the Quick Diff for the technical pages before you apply your changes. How about write in my homepage for a list of pages you intend to work on? Or create a section in my page on the new wordings of your changes so I can apply (or argue with you if I do not agree)? Reasons I may disagree could be
technical contents that have not changed for a long time (e.g. over two years). If the "bad grammar" stayed on that long maybe the bigger problem is Temporal Context changes.
And at least once in Nov, I chanced upon a discarded external site material. Found some material of interest to me, wrote about that here, and subsequently another frequent contributor found it worthwhile to add additional related remarks.
[Later] found another reason in the beauty of unretouched posts. See c2.com and see how long it can keep that old timestamp.
I am all for cleaning up otherwise. Thanks for listening from David Liu
I recently supplied the apostrophe in "that's", where it was missed... but not where doing so would break up a Wiki Name... several dozen of the initial 200 or so pages, most being discovered by editing each page in turn.
Many of the pages carried other errors, such as "its" for "it's", and some of these were corrected not just where first found but also in all pages containing them. All changes were done "in place", without page rearrangement.
However, other things were left - especially if I couldn't determine the original intent. It is quite possible the original author wouldn't revisit, so I added a question mark only for the most glaring examples.
Whether I read every word on a page being changed depended on the length of the page and the quality of the English. However, most were read at high speed and also searched for certain common errors. Some of the pages were also checked using MS Word.
Next up for correction are Ergo Bot, Objects Are From Mars Tables Are From Venus, Three Dee Editors and Vi Sucks.
Does that help you? BTW, I would correct your own contributions more often, but they're time-consuming to locate and correct (your intended meaning is often hard to discern... e.g., "techure").
Someone made 5 points above which I did not notice until the posts are gone, so I do not know whether the same source supplied the above. I am in the midst of bidding for a different job under Death March conditions so I will be brief, and more incoherent as usual :)
I did not create / participate in any of 3 above pages. The page I want to work on personally have been labelled as such a few hours ago.
I post at high speed (so you guys by all means can read high speed as well, been chasing more windmills than I have time for. Category Soa pages I try to have better quality information (external) but at the expense of structure. Business and Change Management topics are typically entered at a slower pace (and they do not go obsolete as quickly).
I do not abandon pages I started, may take a while to go back to check again for improvements (the EJB page where CC and myself had differences took over 9 months, including email to KB for clarifications). But if people insist on deleting (or changing significantly like RightToChangeMyMind) I typically move on to another things.
I pledge to improve the technical contents of technical pages that I have touched (including Java Platform which I do not have personal nor professional interest). And "non Hostile Teacher / Hostile Student" type of interactions are welcomed.
For people who are totally uninterested in what I do here, how about treat my posts as CategoryAutoIgnore? If a page looks bad after my posts, it is probably bad before my posts (one reason is I dislike deleting words from other people, definitely not right away). The main Service Oriented Architecture / Web Services pages are a mess, but these got improved when I first started to contribute (I created a WebServicesOriginal to bookmark a prior version before I applied my knife to the page). Posts made under my Real Name are defended much more rigorously as I typically have more stake in them. In MS related posts I am sharing information with others in a similar learning situation.
My contribution to Prepare The Way is to behave here similarly as how I would behave in an office environment.
A lot of people have been telling you that they strongly dislike your idiosyncratic approach to (what you think is) Wiki Gnomeing.
And now, here you yet again impose your odd thoughts on the subject onto the home page of someone who just passed away, which basically is directly disrespectful and in extremely poor taste, and also is interfering with the steady stream of his friends who have been dropping by to pay their respects and share their memories.
This would be like barging into the funeral of someone you never met, and insisting on moving the coffin around, propping it up (with loose bricks) at a 30 degree angle, throwing the flowers you don't like into the trash, clearing away all of the plates at the wake while people were just beginning to eat, vacuuming and using a powered floor polisher while the priest is conducting the funeral ceremony, forcing mourners to get up and move over to the other side of the church...
Just who do you think you are???
At this point, I really wish you would just stop. Stop. Stop. Stop. -- Doug Merritt
I had exactly the same reaction.
Some of these visitors are probably barely familiar with C2, and putting obstacles in the way of this outpouring of emotional eulogies just seems *outrageously* insensitive.
Liu, get it together.
-- Dan Muller
David, please reconsider your entire approach to editing here. -- Earle Martin
If anyone felt there need to be further discussion on the above, let's do it at The Adjunct. Please note I have written a note regarding Doug Merritt, and any discussion of that would only be responded at The Adjunct, when I have time. Having said that, my attempt at creating the JohnVlissidesRemembered page was not the best action at the time as well. -- David Liu
Concur. Was there anything significantly different in version 71, compared with the later versions (minus recollections/tributes, of course)?
On a separate matter, I think the "Hdot" person will become a flying visitor.
David,
In regard to the above comments, since I was the original person to criticize you immediately above, I have been asked to inform you that Ward Cunningham's officially designated wiki stewards have now put you under a "Soft Ban", which basically means that you are officially (via the authority Ward delegated to the stewards) required to stop posting altogether to c2 wiki for a period of not less than 6 weeks (in round numbers, that would be no sooner than January 15, 2006).
The point of this is not so much to punish you, as it is to try to find a way to force you to think about your attitudes and actions. During the period of the Soft Ban, the idea is that you could use that time to reflect on ways in which you have acted and spoken inappropriately from the point of view of the community. It is a "time out". Stop and think, deeply; use this period of time to reflect and grow.
If you choose to ignore this requested, and un-enforced Soft Ban ("unenforced" is why it's called "soft"), then you may become subject to a "Hard Ban", where stewards may cut off access to c2 wiki from any and all IP addresses that you appear to use.
You may be subject to a Hard Ban even after 2006-Jan-15 if you continue to exercise any poor judgement which wiki Stewards view as antisocial.
None of this is currently intended to say that you are permanently persona non grata; the intention is to tell you that you have been ignoring feedback that is essential for you to react to rather than ignore, and that you are now officially on notice that you may not continue to ignore such feedback, while continuing to participate. You may accept feedback, and change your ways, and continue to be a participant here, or you may ignore feedback, not change your ways, and then be excluded from participation here, first by soft measures, and eventually by increasingly hard measures, if necessary - it's up to you.
On a personal note, as I said recently on The Adjunct, I would like to like you, but you have made that increasingly difficult recently, and it's up to you from here on out.
You are not currently banned in any sense from The Adjunct, as far as I know, so that is, at least for now, an outlet for your voice. You have already received feedback there, as well, that appropriate behavior is demanded.
-- Doug Merritt
I do not think Doug Merritt has the authority ever had the authority to suggest any type of ban on anybody. However I did not (and do not) want to start an argument and I was busy (and still busy), so I left things as they were. Doug if you are ever a steward here, I will consider requesting Ward to remove you from that list, subjected to your future behavior at this site. Notice served 16Jan 2006 -- David Liu
David Liu should simply respond to Costin below, because he says he doesn't want to argue, and I certainly don't, either. But onlookers should note that David Liu did not bother to read the description of Soft Ban (by following that link to our Meatball sister site), which is extremely short, and one cannot help but see that it says regarding Soft Bans:
"It can be applied by anyone whom the community trusts, rather than just a Sys Op."
"It can easily be repealed by a person with higher Community Authority"
...in light of which, it doesn't matter whether I have any authority whatsoever, or even whether I have any community trust at all; all that matters is to observe that no one at all contradicted me after I put the Soft Ban into effect, whether or not my claim that I had backing was true. Therefore everything David is saying here is simply (rather hostile) noise.
I furthermore point out that I explicitly asked David not to regard the Soft Ban as a punishment, but as a period to reflect upon complaints from the c2 community, so as to find a more constructive course upon return from the Soft Ban. I see from the tone of his comment, upon return, that he did not take me up on that opportunity for constructive reflection, which I think is quite unfortunate. This does not bode well for the future. -- Doug Merritt
David, even if I found at the time that Doug's intervention might have been a little bit blunt, you are in no position to give notice to anyone here. You are intruding and polluting this wiki, and I do not even want to go into details as to what were the driving forces that trigered the incident - it was not by chance, it was an accident waiting to happen. So if you do not get your act together, you can count on me to see to it that you get permanently banned from this site. After all, you owe many of us an explanation as to what are you really doing (or trying to do) here. Why don't you start with that? -- Costin
New Year resolution for IT relevance end 2004 version
Microsoft Services For Unix and Python Language appears to be most sensible for me. And Python Language because it is a good "glue" language, and close to Cee Language.
If you think that Microsoft Services For Unix and Python Language are "sensible", and you want to be "close to Cee Language", why not just use Unix? Pick The Right Tool For The Job.
these "could be" sensible. And I need to stay close to MS because I no longer run as fast as fresh starts, and I can leverage MS and IBM background knowledge. Python is "said" to be easy to learn and become useful, so I have a mental image of Vb Classic when I think about Python on those terms. Any further advice?
Cee Language, oh no. Managed Cee Plus Plus may be my entry into the wonderful world of Dot Net. And if Ibm Corporation get more attention, I can always go back to Customer Information Control System. And the darkhorse of Mozilla Technology is C. Sorry Java Language just too big (on learning) and small (in following).
To Do stuff:
Iwanna Learn Generics so I do get to stay at C2. Look Ma, I am doing patterns too.
Getting Out to Geta Life, so I have been told
Rescued from a Mind Wipe, name changed
Nice post XXX. For many years, I have wrestled with what I call this imbalance between my spiritual/nature side and my computer side. I have spent years out in nature with my Native American Medicine Men teachers and then I return to work and I wonder what the hell I am doing here. I tend to go in cycles. I will spend months obsessed with the spiritual side and do no computer activites after work and then swing the other way and obsessively devour books and play with Linux until 6 in the morning. I have been unable to find a balance between the two. But also, I find, as you did, in the scheme of things, this computer stuff is relatively unimportant. There is so much out there and so much to do.
Looking at this, I need Getting Out to Geta Life too :(
With Luck, I will refactor Yagni Principle to YagPi. P as in Program. If I succeed, I will tell people ArchitectsDontCode, and it is not one of my ManagementRoles.
You can blame me for the following... at least
Commercial timeout and notQuickQuestion. I am looking for ways to enhance my IT learning experience by using sites such as www.bloglines.com. Any comments from experienced users of this and /or similar sites?
pages for later review
Arcus Project and their work on Decoupling Of Object Oriented Systems
Java Python demon-gw.denbridgemarine.com update suggests it is "not alive", I seem to get different information by visits at that site, so is it alive and being used?
Links to be investigated
csharp-station article list (e.g. CAS policy)
blog.angus-reid.com Blog tools (Broken Link 2005-08-25)
SBS need to know at www.windowsitpro.com
exercise the brain at www.haaretz.com (Broken Link 2005-08-25)
W3C on invariant URI at www.w3.org
MSN search search.msn.com
Material for a later page on IWANNALEARNProject Management
Essential Elements for Managing Any Successful Project from book at www.informit.com
tips www.jobwerx.com
Improving the Current State www.ebcvg.com
schedule budget overruns and PM www.economist.com
What Google knows about MicrosoftSlave behavior
This is being overused as a Dramatic Identity and the edits being made don't usually even reflect why it's being used.
It is not overused because I am the only one using it, it is better than an IP number (mine changes and also shared with another person), it shows my affiliation (bondage) with a software platform. My previous experience of using real name all the time has not always been memorable, to put it mildly
Hmm. Real Names Please. How can anybody be sure that only one person is using this Dramatic Identity? For me, it's obvious if somebody else claims to be Marty Schrader and makes a change in my name. Of course, I would have to then hunt them down, kill them, and eat them. Well, maybe not eat them; my diet contains enough red meat already.
[I thought long pig was the other white meat?]
I am trying to contact 24.238.146.101 (see Ip Username) but cannot because there is not even a Dramatic Identity used. -- Microsoft Slave
People are missing the point: "Microsoft Slave" is being used as a pseudonym, not a Dramatic Identity. [For the record, this wiki prefers that people use Real Names Only Or Anonymous, please.] -- Anonymous Donor
the pseudonym is useful for Wiki Filterists while going through RecentChanges, either to pickup or avoid posts by the person, much better alternative than those who adopt Ip Username and then go about attacking others who use Real Name. I am not referring to your action by this last comment though.
also a useful pseudonym to be used as Flame Retardant, and posts made under this pseudonym can be on matters less related to core beliefs or IT interests, and will have more Right To Change My Mind.
Microsoft Slave in the News
Made it to the Wiki Vandals page (on and off due to Edit War) during week of 2Aug04. I believe it was put there by lpib.gva.es and I would like some more evidence to support my claim to vandal fame
Discussion re: Use of VIP signatures
Doug,
I got confused by a new page BrufPredictsFailure.
The page is one strand of a thread on the Xp Mailing List, like the page says at the top. Click here to experience the real thing: news://news.gmane.org/gmane.comp.programming.extreme-programming
I got caught by the signature Kent Beck in the new Bruf Predicts Failure as I am collecting VIP visit information for Wiki Vipvisits
With due respect to Phl Ip, I think it is misleading to write as though Kent Beck has joined in on a discussion on this wiki. The act diminishes credibility of this wiki. I like to hear Phl Ip and Mark Irons have to say on this. Please Bear With Me for using your "home" to invite other guests over for a while -- dl
I, the evil [and famous] Phl Ip, have posted many meritorious threads on this Wiki. WikiIsNotaReligion, guys...
The more I think about it, the less this response makes any sense whatsoever, given the context (including the context he gratuitously deleted, an act which also didn't make any sense). Non-responsive or not, this isn't my conversation, so maybe DL's page would be a better place.
Oh? I pretty much thought that we riff-raff had long since driven out the reasonable and knowledgeable folks, leaving nothing but their ancient calling cards. :-) -- dm (I'm about 1/2 kidding)
I would like to see "well-known" people from different companies who have opposing views explain their position here. Would it not be lovely to see Microsoft Corporation views contested by a senior architect from Sun, and then see the discussion being joined by another person from Ibm Corporation? -- dl
You must be kidding. Such people cannot (and certainly should not) say anything that hasn't been vetted by Public Relations. When you actually represent your company, you have to be extremely careful what you say - it can cause your stock to drop, it can cause lawsuits, etc.
And even besides that, I wouldn't trust e.g. Mc Nealy to talk about Sun issues, because anything he said would be self-serving. I trust my own opinions about Sun over whatever Mc Nealy has to say.
So now Phlip is implicitly including me as part of a group that he accuses of thinking that Wiki is a religion, whatever he thinks that means, but I don't think I like his tone, so how about if we move this crud off my page now that you've gotten an answer from him. -- dm
Jon Stewart recently made a quip about Coke and Pepsi debating "beverage truth".
Nice turn of phrase.
Finding edits in Recent Changes done as Microsoft Slave indicate to me that someone does not get the idea of this wiki, and I am more easily tempted to undo these changes.
Please explain more. BTW I have finished my initial edit of The Heart Of Change
Explain what? I think the above is quite clear. If you are interested in discussing the why's: well, I'm not.
See Microsoft Isa Nice Monopoly. [If you can see like Microsoft Slave, who is a nonCategory Microsoft :)]
New Community Members don't use Recent Changes
I do not agree that most newcomers use RecentChanges. I think most are like me, jump from the entry point page (from another website/newsgroup, etc) and jump to C2 links within a page. And like me, most new comers probably wanted to use FindPage or GoogleSearch to see whether other material of interest to them exists at C2 in sufficient quantity. I would like to discuss with Jonathan Tang who has a different view, but he is busy and has been affected by "edit code word".
If I go to a new wiki site now, I use RecentChanges first, not for finding out what pages I should read, but to get an estimate whether there is a site with lots of ACTIVE participants.
I have seen excellent Wiki sites that are only a shell. The resident guru created excellent pages of his technical interest that I share, but I cannot stay because there does not seem to be a vibrant community at the site. --- Wiki Experiences Tag
I would also not want to stay at a new Wiki site if Make Room For All Viewpoints does not work. I live in Meat Space with people of various styles and cultural backgrounds, I do not want to be in a virtual world where everyone is like me, or expect me to support an excessive list of Social norms which I would not understand as a new comer.
<<< I am on site but not responding to query / questions for a few days. Let Hot Pages Cool >>>
Dialog with Dave Voorhis
David, I'm curious as to why you cut out Costin's comments. His comments were apt, appropriate, and probably reflective of the thinking of a number of us who have been reading Web Services Security, Soa Is Night Sky, Boil The Ocean, and similar pages. Therefore, I shall weigh in with a similar comment: What is it that you are trying to convey? What are you trying to accomplish?
As someone who is going to start teaching an undergrad course on Distributed Computing and Web Services early next year, I've been boning up on the subject area. What I've read both on-line and in various books on the subject is generally very clear and understandable. Web Services and Service Oriented Architecture essentially involve straightforward architectural designs and technological approaches, without any need to overcome conceptual, mathematical, or theoretical hurdles. Descriptions of these should be straightforward; indeed, I would hope that pages here would further clarify these already readily-understandable subjects. Unfortunately, though I don't wish to be unkind, and even though your pages have been improving, they are still strangely - for lack of a better word - surreal.
Your lack of clarity does a certain disservice to these topic areas, as they should be easier to understand, even for non-programmers, than more difficult topics such as, for example, Tail Call Optimization, which I picked at random. As it turns out, Tail Call Optimization is much easier to understand than Service Oriented Architecture, and that just shouldn't be the case. -- Dave Voorhis
I do not understand. What is so complicated with Tail Call Optimization, compared to Service Oriented Architecture? Would you like to start What Is Soa page, since you say you are an academic, know Service Oriented Architecture and interested in Fix Your Wiki? And where were you when the SOA page was smaller, see Internet Archive Apr04 version? -- dl
I have provided some response but be forewarned I get Tired Of Debating quickly. That does not mean I do not think discussions are not needed. There needs to be a time, a place and a pace. No public brawls -- dl added after CC and DV added information. Everyone who is interested in this "dialogue" see visit c2.com
Geoff Brown Wiki Experiences??? Eh? I have read it and the associated "quickDiff," and it tells me nothing. If there's a point there, I'm missing it. (The Voorhis scratches its head in profound confusion...)
First, I'd like to know why you evade my questions and the questions of others? I've asked you questions here - what it is that you're trying to convey and what it is that you're trying to accomplish - that you've ignored. You've done this with me before, here and on The Adjunct, and you've done it with others. Yet, you freely ask questions and solicit input from others. Is that fair? Why Are We All Here as a response was made earlier and case closed, at least to Hostile Teacher and / or Hostile Student
Second, I have created a What Is Soa page. I have looked at the What Is Soa page and it is quite good. Mind you it does not adequately reflect other equally important views of Soa, including but not limited to Business Value considerations. For example it may be equally valid to start with an opening statement like "SOA (long name) is an architectural style meant for the implementation of computing services on demand by business, in a more cost effective manner as demanded by a cost conscious operating environment. This is to be achieved by .....". Second comment on SOA is that it may worth your efforts to go retrieve the first internet archive of the main page. I don't think I was the one who started it, but anyway at that moment in history there were also "unknown contributions" by other parties which I feel oblige to include (where possible) in a rewrite.
Good heavens! Do you not realize that your so-called "opening statement" is babble, as opposed to a useful description of essential detail, with no clarification of what the "architectural style" actually is? Business Value considerations might be of value in a discussion of SOA justification, but certainly don't belong in a technical overview of what SOA is. Furthermore, "on demand," "cost effective," and "cost conscious operating environment" are meaningless marketese. They have no objective meaning, at least not without appropriate qualification and quantification. Your so-called "equally valid" statement is, in fact, grossly invalid in the context of the technical and (hopefully) largely no-nonsense nature of this Wiki. If you cannot see the difference, then there must be a profound gulf between your approach to Wiki contribution and (I suspect) that of virtually every author and Wiki Reader here. Furthermore, there are no "views" of SOA, except for the usual journalistic make-a-debate-out-of-nothing opinionated rubbish that is all about fulfilling a wordcount and has no place in a technical forum. SOA has a clear definition, and I have provided it. End of story. There is ample room in my definition for technical refinement and rational expansion, but the so-called "views" you mention do not exist except in some journalist's imagination. As for the "internet archive" of "the main page," I can't see any reason to bother looking for it. If the community didn't see any reason to keep it, then I don't see any reason to look for it.
So let me ask again: What is your purpose in presenting these pages? What do you do? What is your experience and/or interest in SOA or any of its connected technologies? I have to say that at this point, your contributions look like those of (a) an MSc student trolling for thesis material; or (b) an unemployed non-technical project manager hoping to glom enough useful buzz-phrases to score a job in the field, neither of which indicate the slightest bit of experience in the area. Please don't take this as an insult, because it isn't; it's simply the impression your edits convey. -- Dave Voorhis
Third, Tail Call Optimization isn't particularly complicated if you have an understanding of language internals, but it is certainly obscure if you don't, and no amount of explanation will help until you do. By contrast, Service Oriented Architecture is conceptually simple and can easily be understood by non-programmers. I doubt that Tail Call Optimization would make sense to anyone who isn't a programmer. A "simple" concept serve no purpose if implementation in the real world is much more involved. I am saying this to suggest maybe we have a different perspective on Elegant Simplicity vs Essential Complexity. If things are black and white we may not need a wiki.
Here, I have no idea what you're on about. -- DV
Finally, in April 2004 I wasn't here. I've poked my nose in here about once a year since around 1996 or so, but I didn't start participating actively until early 2005. -- Dave Voorhis
To Costin
For easy of reading by Costin use this and Delete When Read -> www.c2.com
Costin you have just got back from Wiki Sym. So I suggest you do not respond right away.
Get some sleep and meanwhile I stay away from technical pages till next week. Deal??? Costin replied and tell me to Walk The Plank, whereas I only wanted him to get some rest without hidden agenda. Also the real color of Costin shows up. I should really restore his previous "polite" message just to show the contrast. I have not find ways The Costin Challenge can be responded to in a civilized manner so I have responded in the manner I have responded. He does not want my offer of sorting out differences the way people do so in business environments so I am withdrawing my offer to defer update to technical pages. This does not mean I will start a furry of create activity either. -- dl
On Message Level Security, a SOA page
With due respect I do not think any one person here can do SOA type pages justice, not even Don Box of Soap Protocol fame. This is because SOA has taken on a life of its own, and there are multiple viewpoints that have different degree of validity.
That does not mean CC, EH, or another highly skilled technical person cannot create better pages than what is already here. I highly encourage anyone (or team of contributors) with sufficient energy to lead a rewrite of Category Soa and / or Category Web Services pages.
OTOH, my concern about having highly technical people getting really into this (controversial) topic is the problem with Self Sealing Belief. Maybe your Wiki Change Proposal wiki, when fully implemented, does have a better solution. But we do not have the luxury of better technology at this time.
David Liu, this site is by and for "technical" people so all of a sudden you put yourself outside this community. If no one person can do these pages justice it is certain that you do such topics a great injustice by having the balls to consider yourself competent enough to approach the subject without heeding the most elementary principle of on-line geek culture: How To Ask Questions The Smart Way. So there's no "we" you can talk about here, there's only you, David Liu, who forms a (more and more irritating) singularity.
Furthermore, you put yourself in an irredeemable troll mode when you suggest that I should go to sleep! It is you, rather, who should Walk The Plank. I'm not one to pamper people with delicate speech, but while I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt by allowing you some unconscious and unwilful incompetence, lately you are more and more in wilful troll mode, so it would not be a great loss to this wiki if you just walked away. I have no desire to waste my time conversing with you in back-room and backwards channels, if you cannot even get the point of having a frank conversation in the public space that you find so convenient to pollute, it's better that you should leave this wiki. -- Costin Cozianu
Material parked here for now.
Author of "Xml Security" book has an ebXml article at dev2dev.bea.com to help people make the distinction between "Message Level Security" and "Message Layer Security". It also goes to explain improvements over Transport level mechanisms like SSL/TLS (e.g. SSL security gap).
For Web Services Security (not WS-security section(s))
In Sep05 Scott Morrison of Layer 7 has these 5 aspects for people concerned with Web Services Security athttp://news.zdnet.com/2102-1009_22-5851259.html?tag=printthis
take broad perspective, consider categories of "attack vector" like API, Infrastructure, Transaction
standards do not have all the answers but important (he said it the other way round)
utilize the flexibility in Web Services
examine the flexibility of the infrastructure from a security perspective too
security architecture need to secure the weakest link - files
Rss Feeds security (RSS is a service using XML and HTTP and is therefore considered by some to be Web Services)
Sep05 views by Greg Reinacker (Newsgator founder) at www.rassoc.com
In the case of feeds users tend to want Single Signon. If their RSS software uses SAML2 and Liberty provisions, then there could be Single Signoff as well. The same source suggested digital signatures may be prudent for some situations. More at radio.weblogs.com
Ajax Web Application security (again Ajax is considered to be a XML service provided via WEB)
It was said IE7 has Xml Http Request without the use of the vulnerable unsigned ActiveX objects
some people are advising against trusting client side validation, due to increased skills in use of "attack proxies" to monitor traffic. The advice include not using client side logic to make security decisions (e.g. filter data for display).
session based Information Security may not be good enough
Since AJAX is Web Services Lite, it shares similar security issues to Web Services (Spoofing, tampering, Disclosure, Repudiation, Service Denial, escalation of privilege, etc., were discussed in seclists.org
A passing note: And some have the gall to wonder why participation rates are way down on this wiki lately? Leave the Slaving Micro dude alone and do something constructive for a change, for heaven's sake!
That's one very smart idea, right there. The analogy in real life would be that if you see somebody throwin garabage in the park or writing his name on the benches, you leave him alone and do something "constructive". What the heck, even if RA would come back we should leave him alone and do something constructive for a change. What did you change lately, by the way?
I do not have a TopMind, but I find necessary to use this pseudonym often, due to Wiki Trolling. It is better than using an Ip Username. You can refer to me as David should we engage in sharing of opinions. And maybe I'll use "mS" as initials since MS is the shortform for a more famous person here.
I have been accused of Wiki Trolling myself, having done too many Create Dont Justify pages. An obvious solution is Slow Down To Speed Up.
I am also an apprentice Mind Broker.
Scott in regards to your questions in Mind Broker, I have a habit of generating my own trail of Random Pages by digging up obscure pages and linking to them. So that page is one of my discoveries in that regard. (Delete When Read)
BTW do you have lots of work related experience you can share re: programming on Wireless Devices?
Sep05
Vb Classic Still tracking down information related to Vb Classic Migration Concerns. Anyone got more on:
Any financially sound company willing to take up the slack MS is leaving, in terms of support?
Page Deletion material moved to Deletion Conventions Discussion.
2006 concerns
Regular Expression software for Dot Net at www.ultrapico.com
David Liu's personal school notes moved here from Capabilities Management:
Capabilities Management is a Strategic Management issue, dealing with an aspect of Organizational Development that aim at managing the overall capabilities of the workforce.
There should not be a term called Process Capability, but..
I have been searching for a proper Wiki Name for a topic on People Management for quite a while now, this one I am using at the moment seem to be the best I can find. Still I am appalled that when I search for "process capability" on Google a large number of returns came back.
When you have highly motivated teams and people skills are aligned to their roles, then great results are achieved even with poor processes. Capabilities lie within the people and the teams, otherwise all companies who pay for an expensive Enterprise Resource Planning package will get instant boost in their capabilities.
In BPM, the project sponsors, managers and analysts are not focussed on Human Resources, and therefore large Business Process Reengineering projects fail. the processes are provably correct / optimal, but the people being asked to man the processes come short of expectations.
In reading The Toyota Way, I have noted a few places where the methods of the Toyota Production System can be construed as Micro Management, and there were notes about huge Change Resistance in western cultures.
If a key champion decides to execute the Change Your Organization strategy in mid program, then the size of the project failure is linked to the size of the project.
Topics of concern to Capabilities Management
At an individual level, it is Human Performance Improvement (HPI)
At a team level, it is Leading Change, Succession Planning and managing Social Dynamics
At an organization level, it is Knowledge Management, Human Capital Workforce Planning
The author, Peter Senge has taken a Systems Thinking approach to describing the capabilities of a Learning Organization. The disciplines are Personal Mastery, Mental Models, Shared Vision, Team learning, Systems Thinking.
Representation of Peter Senge views on learning and capabilities is located at
Alleged Complexity Management failures
From 1997 Strategy and Complexity seminar at London School of Economics, ( www.psych.lse.ac.uk )
"...once a course of action is taken, the outcome in the operational domain depends on how others make distinctions for action, in a complex chain of relations. Senge's emphasis on dynamic complexity in the manager's informational domain means that he fails to deal with these latter distinctions, which are the most significant complexity in order to make things happen."
Project Management aspects
People CMM article at www.sei.cmu.edu
Efforts to install empowered teams are likely to fail if compensation practices continue to reward individual performance without recognizing contribution to team performance and team success.
Resources
circa 2000 Nature and Dynamics of Organizational Capabilities (ISBN: 0198296800)
Organizational Change overview managementhelp.org
Sample survey (attraction/retention/value) using Appreciative Inquiry technique appreciativeinquiry.case.edu
There exist a huge PeopleCapabilityMaturityModel, or PeopleCMM, developed in 2001 and can be downloaded at www.sei.cmu.edu
Strategic Capabilities at www.providersedge.com
Exploit intangible assets to create value www.juergendaum.com
Leader Ship Change Management attitude - Empathize and not Sympathize blogs.cio.com
Moved from Complex Event Processing:
Complex Event Processing involves obtaining a human understanding of the multitude of low-level events produced by computers and information systems
From a product perspective, Complex Event Processing (CEP) is a category of infrastructure software complementary to financial trading systems, market data systems, and Business Process Management (BPM). The term "CEP", in its usage suggested here, was arguably coined in 2002 by Stanford University professor David Luckham in combination with mainstream industry analysts (Gartner, Forrester), and has been also used by several vendors in the space (APTSoft, NEON Systems, TIBCO, etc.). As of 2005, it has become a more mainstream term and is considered to be an important component of any advanced Business Activity Monitoring (BAM) solution.
Some (see Big Blue link in Enterprise Service Bus) view Event Driven Architecture is aworking implementation of the Complex Event Processing nirvana.
CEP - an IT response to Complexity Management requirements
Viable Systems Modeling can be seen as a Business Model to articulate the forces that shape an organization, see for example, a paper at www.syncho.com
IT has a solution to every problem. One view is that Complex Event Processing is responding to the need to handle issues in the Complexity Management domain, e.g. getting information to manage a crisis, there is no time to build an application to provide relevant information.
There is a fair number of links relating CEP and VSM, an example being the CEP blog which tracks sources related to Complex Event Processing, at cep.weblogger.com
References
2004 Why Our Computers Act Irrationally at www.ftponline.com
Old discussions - to be removed
Moved from Portal Software:
2006 Update
BEA has renamed Plumtree as Aqua Logic, maybe it is included in the Aqua Logic Service Bus suite of products.
Portal Software classification and characterization
Following taxonomy taken from a 2002 paper done by Giga and available at Microsoft at download.microsoft.com
Framework - management, administration, customization
Infrastructure - security, integration, development and maintenance
Content aggregation / management - include notification, versioning, etc
Application integration and tools - include and extend existing applications
Collaboration and Communities - to support Community Of Practice
Vendor market execution - assessment of vendor capabilities as perceived by market
Economic impact - product ability to help create value for its users
Solution delivery - participation in a total solution environment
Archetypall use cases from www.cmswatch.com
Dynamic web publishing
Self-service
Collaboration
Intranet
E-business
Also from the cmswatch site are these observations:
In reality though, what often happens is that portals prove to be just the tip of the iceberg, with much more work to customize and integrate the various layers than most customers expect. As with other similar technologies, portal buyers tend to underestimate implementation times and costs and overestimate the pace of user adoption and business pay-back.
From Wiki Pedia on Portal Software:
Content and document management
Collaboration
Search and navigation
Personalization
Entitlement
Integration
Single sign-on
(Becoming) The most expensive newsletter
In a 2004 article at www.computerworld.com.au , a Meta Group commentator said many Portal Software implementations have become glorified intranets, due to various reasons including :
portals that got commissioned without proper business cases,
under funded complex applications,
lack of (understanding of) technical integration issues.
Not being used by knowledge workers
Sourced from the 2002 article at DMreview dmreview.com link, knowledge workers were not using the portal due to usability and "integrity of contents".
Here are my take from the details of the problem described.
Usability - it appear "portal administration" is under-funded, amongst other concerns
Integrity - it is a matter of credibility. There is insufficient trust, sometimes rightly so, largely due to the limited scope of the portals. It is a chicken and egg problem common to a lot of Knowledge Management projects.
Search and Adopt
Some people are saying the ability (or lack of) to do search well will make or break Portal Software. To that extent, at www.itwire.com.au a headline grabbing article talk about the battle between Microsoft and Google.
Afterall, the desktop is the ultimate Portal Software.
Emergent risks
Tower of Babel
Earlier this year I read there is renewed interest in organizations to using Portal Software to deliver information. However the big players like Sap Corporation, Microsoft Corporation etc are also viewing these products as gateways to increase use of their IT products. It will be confusing. See "Portal Proliferation " at www.cio.com.au , titled "Portals At the Crossroads".
The capabilities of the belated JSR168 for portal / portlet interoperability was seen as insufficient.
"edge of the enterprise" require active leadership to succeed
success of portals rely on Cultural Readiness.
Alternate Solutions, more limited but focussed
"Service Oriented Applications"
While seeking information related to solutions for information and records management, I came across this note at webservices.sys-con.com , article titled
"Managing SOX in the Age of SOA"
"... Instead of a portal, the company now has a Customer Web Service hub to which customers can connect directly using their ERP systems "
"Intranet - demand high as ever"
It appear to me the structure provided by a Portal Software is exactly the kind of thing that knowledge workers want to avoid. The knowledge workers spend a lot of time interfacing with information in application systems, emails, ERPs that they are comfortable with. Using a "technology push" mechanism to impose new rules is very hard to achieve. I once had a discussion with an user area who needed something quickly, the portal was not adopted due to concern over the learning curve involved. The "rudimentary authoring" limitation in the article below was suggested as a reason intranets will not go away.
Reference material
Taking a business-centric approach to portals at www.steptwo.com.au examine the pros and cons with a 2006 perspective
Pros:
some integration is easy (e.g. email)
single sign-on can work
portlets can be useful
built-in extensibility features can provide benefits
IDE facilities integrated for inhouse development of new functionalities
Cons
Inflexible in design / appearance
Cannot perform content / site management requirements - rudimentary authoring capacilities
no support for mechanisms to assist with provision of information from disparate sources
can be a limiting factor to solutions due to ideosyncracies of the chosen and customized portal platform
personalization features remain unused or troublesome
see also Wiki Portal Enterprise Information Portal
Moved from Complexity Management:
Business Process Management (BPM) dimension
There can be Accidental Complexity that are process oriented. An example can be the need to integrate processes of two firms that have recently merged. Integration can involve re-negotiation with staff, unions and even suppliers and customers.
The objective of BPM is to reduce complexity, without shifting costs and concerns (e.g. risk) to other parts of the organization unnecessarily.
An analyst with Systems Thinking capabilities can note the interactions between related components in a system, and see these as either the source of a problem, or an opportunity to help solving problems.
Viable Systems Modeling (VSM) techniques pioneered by Stafford Beer, seen used at cooperatives (see e.g. open.coop ), is an example of the application of System Thinking to Complexity Management
VSM is actually classified within the genre of General Systems Theory (GST), a paper on the exploration of this loosely connected set of concepts can be seen at journals.isss.org
A wiki dedicated to Cybernetics is at cybernetics.wikispaces.com , and they have a description of GST at cybernetics.wikispaces.com
Applications of GST research in real life include but not limited to Public Policy making.
Moved from Stu Charlton:
More Mail
I have added a section linking CEP and Complexity Management, a new page I started. When you have time, kindly take a quick look and see anything contrary to your perspectives.
Moved from Race To The Bottom:
Race To The Bottom page was a victim of a Race To The Bottom exercise earlier, if my recollections are accurate.
Lets see a nonwiki description of this phenomena, at www.wisegeek.com
BTW, one way to avoid wiki Race To The Bottom behavior was stated in Exponential Backoff Editing
Moved from Competitive Strategy:
isbn: 0-684-84148-7
Originally written in 1979, Michael Porters book helped companies to use Business Modeling to develop business strategies, through the use of the "Five Forces" competitive framework laid out within.
See Wiki Pedia entry at en.wikipedia.org for an introductory guide on the subject.
In a new introduction written in 1998, the author suggested his book "provided tools for capturing the richness and heterogeneity of industries and companies while providing a disciplined structure for examining them."
Although new technologies, e.g. arrival of internet age, came and environments change (e.g. increased globalization), the author maintained his viewspoints remain relevant.
Strategy is about making tough choices
A strategic position is a path, not a fixed location
The author also suggested that his framework is "dynamic", by disclosing most significant "dimensions of change".
Staying flexible destroys competitive advantage
He suggests jumping from strategy to strategy makes it impossible for companies to be good at implementing any strategy. He does recognize the need to continually incorporate new ideas to maintain operational effectiveness.
Operational Effectiveness is not strategy
sourced from 1996 HBR "What is a Strategy"
The various management tools dramatically improve effectivenss but are not strategy because these cannot be sustained.
What is a strategy summary is available at www.maaw.info
Strategy Execution concerns
Strategy hasn't changed, but change has
South West airlines said to be continuous in its strategy of 30 years ago, serving price-minded travellers, but do so in a different way. There is a "need to balance the internal juxtaposition of change and continuity."
taken from 2001 article on Porter strategy at www.fastcompany.com
CoOpetition - A Complexity Management issue
In a ?1999 preface, many years following the original "Competitive Strategy" book, Porter acknowledged rise of a phenomena called Co Opetition where competitors in the same market space work together to enlarge the market for the benefit of both. Without this Systems Thinking we will see a Race To The Bottom between the strongest players in a market segment, affecting the financial health of all involved.
On Japan but not specifically The Toyota Way
M Porter has a 2001 book called "Can Japan Compete?" (ISBN : 0465059899) where he said the Japanese companies were engaged in a "competitieve convergence" through imitation of each other.
A two part interview regarding this book can be seen at hbswk.hbs.edu
Moved from Strategy Execution:
This page is reserved for material related to Business Model to Business Process Management to Enterprise Application Integration Value Stream Mapping exercise.
Strategy Execution need to have sufficient attention to Risk Management. However the determination of Strategic Risk is an exercise that belongs within Strategic Planning.
From a 1997 description from the successful Southwestern Airlines CEO, at pfdf.org
"(Corporate) Culture Defines Personality" and "Personality Is Strategy"
(We are) In an industry where a two-week plan is likely to become obsolete...
...rather than trying to predict what we'll do, we try to define who we are and what we want
Also in the above story, the CEO recounted a Make Room For All Viewpoints lesson learnt from his early career days.
"Wanting to learn from the best, I went to see two of the most renowned litigators in San Antonio try cases. One sat there and never objected to anything, but was very gentle with witnesses and established a rapport with the jury. The other was an aggressive, thundering hell-raiser. And both seemed to win every case"
Avoiding Business Impedance Mismatch
no good material yet
To MichaelSparks who dismissed this page four weeks ago
I have not seen people seconded your delete, I have restored it because
I think the backlinks are useful, it helps me to get to various pages that have elements of Strategy Execution
I am parking a link to a good story from the CEO of South West Airlines, and will intend to park other good stories as I see it
If there is a new round of delete attempts I will move aside and let community decide again
The Win Win case is actually having other people join in to add content related to (Business) Strategy Execution
Is that agreeable to you?
Moved from Cultural Change:
The Key to Cultural Transformation at pfdf.org talked about Em Powerment, has some similarities to the South West Airlines CEO articulation of successful Strategy Execution
Moved from Business Impedance Mismatch:
Business Impedance Mismatch happened here, and will recur at my next workplace.
Business Impedance Mismatch starts with the mismatch between Strategic Management initiatives and Business Process Management projects. The gulf between expectations and realities grew bigger when Business Process Management projects get implemented via System Integration tasks.
References
Aligning actions and values by Jim Collins at pfdf.org
Moved from Leader Ship:
Drucker foundation Leader to Leader guide at pfdf.org
Moved from Process Focused Organization:
[ISBN: 0-87389-627-0 ]
A book on realizing Business Process Management published in 2004.
Sample chapter on Corporate Performance Management can be downloaded at qualitypress.asq.org
Appear to have attempts to address the psychology of Change Management, by saying Turn Around Management fails due to excessive pressure to find and pick Low Hanging Fruit
Author claimed to have been influenced by many well known thinkers and practioners
Have not got book, cannot tell how much practical information is there
Moved from Change Your Organization Tactics:
"Do your work" establishes reputation and credibility, its Amatter Of Trust. Not easy due to Cognitive Dissonance
Shields Up, says the Paranoids Anonymous
Moved from Inspiring Leadership:
Originally created for the Formula For Success page, this has a wider scope then originally intended.
Borrowed words from others
"Be the Change You want to See in Your World"
Examples and how so
Famous people
PopeJohnPaulSecond
Unknown or littleknown persons - instances of Inspiring Leadership
See an example on deeds related to NineOneOne at www.bsignificant.com
??Looking for more examples
e.g. courage-under-fire
someone doing the right thing at the right time,
Wiki examples excluding Ward
? JeffGrigg for being around and working for the betterment of wiki for a long time, but not heard much, or seen to have lost control publicly? Haven't seen him getting entangled in any edit wars, maybe he does not use Recent Changes
Books on Inspiring Leadership
[ISBN: 0071464875 ]
[ISBN: 0972732322 ]
[ISBN: 0071464875]
[ISBN: 1591840449]
[ISBN: 1861529821]
Warning: The page is getting worse at this moment, hopefully it will get better
What I want out of this
A page to come to revisit from time to time
A page to rediscover that leadership aspirations, and possibilities, exist within most of us
So while I am interested in leadership that is universally acclaimed, I get more thrilled by examples shown by the unknown individuals whose names will be forgotten but actions linger in a positive way.
Hopefully the leadership examples can be followed by others.
Moved from Change Management:
Large group Change Management case www.new-paradigm.co.uk
Moved from Business Process Management:
Business Process Management, BPM for short, is concerned with the integration of work processes that have evolved separately to serve functional needs in the enterprise. At times the lesser used term Business Process Integration (BPI) is employed to stress the importance of "integration".
This approach focus on needs of the company to constantly evolve its processes to respond to changes in the business environment (regulatory and legislative requirements, competitive forces, partnering opportunities, etc). See www.bcs.org for a new book from British Computing Society.
Another related term is BusinessProcessImprovement. A classic (1991) book on this is ISBN: 0070267685.
See also The Business Of Bpm and The Technology Of Bpm
Business Process Management is not really new, according to bpm-today.newsfactor.com . It cited Enterprise Resource Planning as an example of software that already incorporated process management, before the term has been adopted widely. And in business the concept of Supply Chain Management has been around for a while.
Business Process Reengineering can be one approach used to addressing the needs of Business Process Management. In these instances, the project scope will invariably be crossing existing organization boundaries. OTOH, some felt Business Process Reengineering is not Business Process Management, see www.darwinmag.com .
The authors of Component Based Business provide a conceptual framework to building an organization that is inherently agile.
Standards organizations have already made progress in defining building blocks for IT solutions. An example of this being the Extensible Markup Language based BPEL (Business Process Execution Language).
One vendor consortium is BPMI, which has produced several specifications. See www.bpmi.org
BPMI has merged with Object Management Group. Waiting to see whether Business Process Modeling Notation is indeed going to be used widely over other alternatives for Process Modeling, including the good old flowchart (over 50 years old).
The Strategy dimension
Need to link to Strategic Planning for larger projects
Nick Carr, author of Does It Matter, said in his May03 article at www.dataframeworks.com titled "IT Doesn't Matter", that former Strategic investments could and would turn to becoming a strategic liability. He suggested American Hospital Supply innovative use of IT in the 70's locked out competitors, but that system was viewed as a "millstone around their necks" by senior management in the 90's.
It is therefore within the mandate of Business Process Management to examine whether process improvement efforts will create a longterm liability that may exceed the benefits that can be realized within the planning horizon.
Systems Thinking - a "core" competency
Peter Fingar said "General System Thinking" is a required Domain Knowledge for BPM practioners, because BPM is about the business of managing complexity. See Sep05 article in BPTrends
He said this as a description of Systems Thinking
Systems thinking is a discipline for seeing wholes. It is a framework for seeing interrelationships rather than things, for seeing patterns of change rather than static snapshots.
BPM related programs and initiatives
Six Sigma - not business focussed
A few years ago, Six Sigma was leading the Change Management drives in many organizations. People were getting certified by consulting firms, statistics were collected and interpreted, and a few good things emerged.
An article called BPM 101, at www.buzzle.com , written by the president of Six Sigma in 2006, have all these engineering based terms like "benchmarking", "diagnosing", "base-lining", "measure", "data-driven" etc embedded throughout his thesis.
I tried in vain to search for words like communicating, negotiating, etc but it is still good to have his perspective
Resources
Lombardisoftware has a survival guide at www.lombardisoftware.com .
Tibco sponsored paper on BPM user guide at www.tibco.com
A 2003 book called "The Third Wave", co-authored by the BPMI co-chair Howard Smith, can be viewed at www.fairdene.com . The viewpoints expressed elicited a large body of comments on the subject, implementation and impact of Business Process Management.
For people interested in the history of Business Process Management, see a multipart blog in 2006 at www.ebizq.net .
A widely read blog on the technical dimension of Business Process Management is available at itredux.com
Business Process Reengineering resource site www.prosci.com
Two of the larger websites dedicated to Business Process Management concerns are:
BPTrends - www.bptrends.com
Business Process Management Group - www.bpmg.org
International Institute of Business Analysis has a 200page Book of Knowledge to download
Peter Senge book on Dance of Change www.fieldbook.com
Moved from Does It Matter:
The late Peter Drucker said in "The Next Information Revolution" article
It can be argued that the computer and the data flow it made possible, including the new information concepts, actually have done more harm than good to business management
Moved from The Fifth Discipline:
ec1.images-amazon.com
[ISBN 0-385-51725-4] While Senge's book frames the issue and primes management for a pattern-based view of the world, it's my personal opinion that his approach to finding these patterns is a bit haphazard, and I certainly feel his diagraming style could use some help. I'd really like to see some convergence between the tech-centric and business-centric worlds (isn't this one of the things we are supposed to get from Object Technology) and a well defined method of documenting patterns across the two might be a nice starting place.
Note book enlarged with over 100 pages of new material in 2006. Older version is at [ISBN 0-385-26095-4]
The older book cover looks like
2006 revised edition
It has a new section called "Reflections from Practice" which from browsing, appear to have a Societal dimension (a worldview in the real sense) to it. This seem to match up with a new Appendix on "U Process". A reference to "U process" can be seen at www.generonconsulting.com
Moved from Getting To Yes:
Later chapters talk about some additional techniques, most notably Best Alternative To Negotiated Agreement, or BATN.
The Harvard Negotiation Project originated technique advocated in the book is also known as "Interest based negotiation".
A summary of the concepts can be found at www.colorado.edu
William Fry also authored a followup book called Getting Past No, at [ISBN: 0553371312].
The advocated technique, over twenty years old, is said to have suffered from difficulties in practice due to human limitations. And some critics have remarked that not all problem domains can be resolved using this technique. See more at www.colorado.edu
Moved from Wiki Mind Wipe Reality Check:
Chancing on this old page, I think Slow Down To Speed Up is the only viable deterrent prevent arriving at the unwanted Pissed Off And Extremely Angry Mental Totems. Time to reread Getting To Yes.
Moved from Prisoners Dilemma:
There is a modified Prisoners Dilemma game described in a 2005 paper at www.lse.ac.uk worth reading. Its title is "Separating Trust from Cooperation in a Dynamic Relationship".
Moved from Culture Is The Manifestation Of Leadership:
Peter Senge, in a 1996 article titled "The Ecology of Leadership", observed:
"In the past 5 years, corporate leaders have talked more about learning and development than in the previous 50" (note The Fifth Discipline was published in 1990).
"As with any lasting change, the senior executive's ability to implement a true learning organization is overrated."
"The top team is often the most dysfunctional of all", and ".. often not particularly good team players"
post mortem analysis by a headhunter at www.cfo.com compared Fiorina with Lou Gerstner the Chief Software Architect. It was interesting reading.
The Lessons From Failure for HP and Fiorna keep coming, a Sep06 story at www.canada.com suggested now there is a huge legal mess to be untangled, due to subsequent activities conducted by members of the Board of Directors.
Without Shared Vision and Team Learning, Management Team at the top will have difficulties in meeting up to the challenges of The Dance Of Change game.
David Liu page last change before this one, around Oct06, reverted this round
David Liu is seeking new opportunities, after leaving his "secure job" of the past decade, and will be too busy to engage this community for now. If you want to contact me, please leave a message at my Meat Ball home page and I will try to watch that from time to time -- dl 29Jun07
See original on c2.com