ECM: once again MIA at EMC

ECM: once again MIA at EMC

Found this interesting “map” that EMC shared on LinkedIn earlier today.  Sometimes, the story is more about what’s not on the map… and in this case, it’s ECM (and Documentum) that’s MIA from yet another EMC publication.*

*In all fairness, the map does contain a bullet point labelled “Intelligence” in the “Security” panel.  Conceivably, this could refer to IIG. However, there are no references to IIG or Documentum elsewhere on the graphic, credits, or supporting page, nor on the two other EMC “storymap” pages covering IT Transformation or Big Data.

A thought for Friday

 

One good reason to need the eggs: Shakshuka. (photo: Tori Avey)
One good reason to need the eggs: Shakshuka. (photo: Tori Avey/theshiksa.com)

For some reason, an old (or what we now label as either “well-aged”,  “classic”, or “artisan”) story comes to mind this morning:

Mrs. Nussbaum goes to a psychiatrist and says, “Doctor, you should know – my husband’s gone totally meshugge (crazy); he woke up one morning last year and decided he’s a chicken.”

The doctor strokes his goatee and says, “Hmmm…. since last year, you say?  Mrs. Nussbaum – why did you wait so long to tell anyone about this?”

Mrs. Nussbaum replies, “Truth is, I wanted to tell you – right away, in fact. Only problem was, we really needed the eggs.”

More now than ever, it seems like many people find themselves wasting so much time on dealing with issues and things that are absurd, irrational, or just down-right meshugge.  (Think “Catch-22” level absurdity and you’re on the right track.)

It’s all the more frustrating, when all they’re trying to do are the right things for their clients, colleagues, family, and/or themselves.

And yet… they all still come back, day after day, just like most everyone else does around the globe.  Why do they do it?  My guess is that sometimes, you really have no choice when you find yourself needing those eggs.

Now it’s your turn to respond in the comments:  Looking to see who’s up to sharing their own “egg” story (i.e.; what crazy situations do you put up with, because you don’t have any other choice?)

An MBA In Less Than 400 Pages? Read on…

elements of mba

smartvsstupid
Images courtesy of amazon.com and Stanley Bing. Now go ahead and buy the book.

Time to add this one to the bookshelf, people – if for no other reason than for all of the graphics and charts, including the two I’ve shared here:

The book is called “The Curriculum” and it’s from Stanley Bing, the guy who brought us “Crazy Bosses”,  “Sun Tzu Was A Sissy: Conquer Your Enemies, Promote Your Friends, and Wage the Real Art of War,  and the classic “What Would Machiavelli Do? The Ends Justify the Meanness”:

Can you really pack a two-year, $250,000-curriculum in a single book? Author and longtime Fortune columnist Stanley Bing sets out to do exactly that in “The Curriculum: Everything You Need to Know to Be a Master of Business Arts.”

If the concept strikes you as preposterous, a peek inside will do little to dispel these doubts. From the accreditation body, the National Association for Serious Study (“dedicated to a number of serious studies”),  to a core curriculum that includes “Not Appearing Stupid” and “Crazy People,” the book offers a satirical take on an overly staid subject.

via An MBA In Less Than 400 Pages? | Poets and Quants.

Heartbeat, complexity, and common-mode failure

“The Heartbleed problem can be blamed on complexity; all Internet standards become festooned with complicating option sets that no one person can know in their entirety. The Heartbleed problem can be blamed on insufficient investment; safety review for open source code is rarely funded, nor sustainable when it is. The Heartbleed problem can be blamed on poor planning; wide deployment within critical functions but without any repair regime.”

Quote is from Dr. Dan Geer’s must-read “Heartbleed as Metaphor” article on Lawfare.  Brilliant examination of the true lessons we need to learn from this software exploit’s ‘success’, in order to best prepare for the next common-mode failure. Another quote worth sharing (but I still recommend reading the article in its entirety):

The critical infrastructure’s monoculture problem, and hence its exposure to common mode risk, is now small devices and the chips which run them.  As the monocultures build, they do so in ever more pervasive, ever smaller packages, in ever less noticeable roles.  The avenues to common mode failure proliferate. 

Thanks to common-mode proliferation, we don’t have the luxury of worrying about If something will happen any longer – it’s now just a matter of When.

Deliberate Disruption

Inspired by Lee Dallas, blogging at bigmenoncontent.com:

Dilbert_thumb
* based on a quote from bigmenoncontent.com, with apologies to Scott Adams

Big Men On Content

Last weekend Box CEO Aaron Levie tweeted

“Disruption is the art of identifying which parts of the past are no longer relevant to the future, and exploiting that delta at all costs.”

To which I responded :

“deliberate disruption is extraordinarily rare. So rare that I think you can capitalize on it but never plan for it

I’ve been asking myself this question since. Can disruption ever really be deliberate?

The question conjures up images of team meetings where Dilbert’s pointed haired boss declares, “nobody leaves this room until we innovate!”

It occurs to me that in order to be deliberate, disruption must be an objective not just an outcome. This is a mistake.

Truly disruptive technology sets out to solve a problem first. Disruption is a possible but not guaranteed outcome of innovation introduced into a landscape. That landscape is made up of evolving technology, existing competition, and fluid user expectations all of…

View original post 263 more words

Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.

%d bloggers like this: