Discussion: View Thread

  • 1.  ascerbic

    Posted 02-27-2000 11:28
    On Sat, 26 Feb 2000 Fred Nickols wrote, Re: Technology-driven change
    >
    >Re the thread started by Steve Harper's inquiry about change management and
    >including Jack Ring's somewhat acerbic comment about ERP in general (which
    >was raised by Steve).

    Fred,
    Sorry about your need to hang labels on my views. Hope you recover.
    But to the real question Steve posed -- are you saying that
    technology-driven change will be more acceptable simply by thinking about
    your questions? Or must one *do* something, and if so, what?
    Jack Ring, 32712 N. 70th St., Snottsdale, AZ 85262-7143
    480-488-4615, Cell) 602.369.4615
    A system must be designed not for the existing situation but for the
    situation that will exist after the system is activated.


  • 2.  ascerbic

    Posted 02-27-2000 14:20
    Earlier, I wrote...

    > >Re the thread started by Steve Harper's inquiry about change management and
    > >including Jack Ring's somewhat acerbic comment about ERP in general (which
    > >was raised by Steve).

    To which Jack Ring replied...

    >Fred,
    >Sorry about your need to hang labels on my views. Hope you recover.

    I'll probably get over it; some kind of bug most likely. And I'm sorry to
    hear your skin has gotten so thin. Hope you get over that, too.

    >But to the real question Steve posed -- are you saying that
    >technology-driven change will be more acceptable simply by thinking about
    >your questions? Or must one *do* something, and if so, what?

    Yes, one must do something; one must always do something unless one has
    determined that deliberate inaction is the appropriate thing to do (or not
    do as would seem to be the case). Mostly one must ask and keep asking
    questions until the uncertainty regarding what to do is reduced to the
    point where action can be taken.

    Repeating a portion of my earlier post:

    >Who are the user communities?

    One must identify them. That usually means asking questions about who uses
    the system and for what purposes. This questioning continues until no new
    user groups have been identified.

    >Where are they? (Physically and organizationally)

    One must locate them. Are they all at one site or at several sites? Are
    they in one geographic area or several? Are they in one, a few or all
    organizational units?

    >How are they organized?

    One must determine how they all relate to one another. Are they connected
    by the kind of work they do? By their profession? By a work process? Or
    is their only connection the system they use?

    >Who are their leaders?

    One must determine how they are led (and managed). Do their bosses speak
    for them or are informal leaders the real centers of influence? Do they
    stick together or are they easily divided and ruled? Who speaks for the
    various subsets of the user community? Officially? Unofficially? Do they
    even have any leaders?

    (I'm skipping the next few)
    >Who are the quiet influencers?
    >What are their concerns?
    >What is their power base?
    >How can we enlist their support?

    Will it be enough to go to them with the business case for the new system
    (if there is one) or will they require a stronger sell? What benefits
    accrue to them from the new system and how can we focus their attention on
    these? What do we want from them in the way of support (e.g., timely
    notification of glitches, ideas for their resolution, etc.)? What channels
    of communication need to be set up to facilitate this communication?

    >How can we involve them in truly meaningful ways?

    Can we get them to act as "glitch detectors"? Can we make a meaningful
    contribution out of finding fault with the system? Can we get them to
    volunteer to check out "fixes" to glitches that others have
    identified? Can we get them to construct "test cases" to push through the
    system as a way of identifying glitches?

    >How do we keep them in the loop?
    >How will missteps be handled?

    One must engage the user community, Jack. How one does that varies with
    the system, the company, the user community, the culture, the history of
    prior interventions, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.

    Do you have a particular case in mind?
    --

    Fred Nickols
    The Distance Consulting Company
    "Assistance at A Distance"
    http://home.att.net/~nickols/distance.htm
    nickols@worldnet.att.net
    (609) 490-0095


  • 3.  ascerbic

    Posted 02-27-2000 14:56
    ACERBIC


  • 4.  ascerbic

    Posted 02-27-2000 16:33
    Clive Muir wrote (using the subject line "Re: ascerbic":

    >ACERBIC

    Hmm. That's how I spelled it in the body of my message but thanks for the
    reminder. Generally speaking, I don't edit the subject line in messages to
    which I am responding (including this one and in the one you sent). Which
    reminds me, I've always wondered if Winston Churchill's comment about
    arrant pedantry should have used errant. What do you think?

    Of course, Jack could have meant to use ascorbic, which is Vitamin C or a
    sugar, and that could have been a way of telling me to lighten up (and
    sweeten up) and so he deliberately brewed up a new word (ascerbic) by
    combining acerbic and ascorbic. But then Jack's always been pretty capable
    of speaking for himself so we'll see what he says.
    --


    Fred Nickols
    The Distance Consulting Company
    "Assistance at A Distance"
    http://home.att.net/~nickols/distance.htm
    nickols@worldnet.att.net
    (609) 490-0095