modest suggestion for how to proceed

[Dave Crocker]

Keith,

continuing down the path of project management theory...


Tuesday, March 25, 2003, 6:56:53 PM, you wrote:
>> We spend all of our time studying the problem and none fixing it.

KM> well, if 60 days is "all of our time"

I said something about 8 months, and nothing about 60 days.  So I have
no idea what you are referring to.


KM> the best way to waste time that I know of is to try to solve a problem
KM> without understanding that problem.

In terms of standards efforts, there is massive evidence showing that
the best way to waste time is to try to study a complex problem in its
entirety, before doing anything productive. You take a long time doing
the studying. You never fully understand the problem, because complex
problems are fickle things. Participants change, so you lose continuity.
And you miss the market window.

The model of "produce something useful early, then increment
capabilities" has been the hallmark of good IETF work.  It particularly
distinguishes it from other standards groups.

Applying that same thinking to the IETF itself, as was done from the
Kobe situation:  Look for problems that are factorable and for which we
think we can develop useful solutions.  Implement them.  See what needs
fixing next.

The 'larger' view works in the background, during all of this, so that
we do not get efforts at cross-purposes, as you note.



KM> and when someone proposes a constructive way to move forward, that
KM> person is derided for threatening to waste time.  perhaps we'd rather
KM> argue than work productively?

Lots of people have suggested lots of constructive ideas.

d/
--
 Dave Crocker <mailto:dcrocker at brandenburg.com>
 Brandenburg InternetWorking <http://www.brandenburg.com>
 Sunnyvale, CA  USA <tel:+1.408.246.8253>, <fax:+1.866.358.5301>