× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.


  • Subject: RE: Thoughts on Enterprise Rent-a-car
  • From: "Schenck, Don" <Don.Schenck@xxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 08:22:38 -0400

Cool story ... but I doubt it.

I think it's more a matter of a company trying to use "continuing
improvement" with regard to I.T. As a result, they keep throwing out the old
and bringing in the new (and less expensive).

The problem is this -- and I'm sure the accountants have addressed this
issue: is it really less expensive to start all over?

Peace,

-- Don Schenck

-----Original Message-----
From: Wynn Osborne [mailto:wynn@praxis.net]
Sent: June 21, 2000 12:13 AM
To: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
Subject: Thoughts on Enterprise Rent-a-car


Is it a new CIO? CEO? COO?

In my somewhat limited time in this business, I've noticed the following
trend several times. Maybe it applies here.


A new dude is hired. The company thinks he's an operational God. His first
words are, "No wonder this company's having problems. The computer system
stinks!" "Damn, he's right.", utters the CEO. "Fix it!"

The dude consumes a few years making a comfortable living, implements his
bold new "5 year plan for turning the company around", fires a bunch of
people, installs new hardware & software, receives that big bonus, orders
new cherry wood furniture, and plays Mr. Politician for the remainder of
his tenure.

Then one day, the dude's current boss notices (usually at the end of a
business cycle, e.g., a recession), "Damn these IT guys sure cost us a lot
for damn little. We need a new CIO."

Thus begins iteration 2. Iteration 2 happens without notice because
Iteration 1 started so long ago that nobody on the payroll was around when
iteration 1 began.

The process repeats itself until either the company is bought by another
company, or the company goes out of business.

If the former occurs, the process again repeats itself, starting with
iteration 1. Why iteration 1 and not, say iteration 10? Because any such
iterations occurring before the company was sold are irrelevant, a.k.a.,
"Those idiots couldn't do anything right. We'll do it the right way."

If the latter occurs, the company had it coming anyway since the problem
never was with the computer system to begin with---it was the way they ran
the business.

Quite simple really :-)

Wynn
+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...


Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.