<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Design, dynamism and corporations</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cultureby.com/2006/05/design_dynamism.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cultureby.com/2006/05/design_dynamism.html</link>
	<description>This Blog Sits At the Intersection of Anthropology and Economics</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 May 2012 21:10:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: steve</title>
		<link>http://cultureby.com/2006/05/design_dynamism.html/comment-page-1#comment-4526</link>
		<dc:creator>steve</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 May 2006 13:03:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost/wp_culture/?p=702#comment-4526</guid>
		<description>Going into fugue state..cannot resist self-plug...I have a paper on the phenomenon of technical progress and knowledge specialization for which this post is a classic example. See &quot;Islands of Shared Knowledge: Specialization and Mutual Understanding in Problem-Solving Teams,&quot; Organization Science vol. 13, no. 3, pp.303-320.
The same kind of thing happened in semiconductor design. Once the transistor density got high enough, designers of logic no longer needed to understand the physical intricacies of chip layout. Earlier, it happened with software--when computers got enough speed and memory, programmers didn&#039;t need to know as much about the internal workings of the machine. The process is reversible, though, because new applications may arise where the underlying technology gets pushed so hard that designers have to know how it works in some detail.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Going into fugue state..cannot resist self-plug&#8230;I have a paper on the phenomenon of technical progress and knowledge specialization for which this post is a classic example. See &#8220;Islands of Shared Knowledge: Specialization and Mutual Understanding in Problem-Solving Teams,&#8221; Organization Science vol. 13, no. 3, pp.303-320.</p>
<p>The same kind of thing happened in semiconductor design. Once the transistor density got high enough, designers of logic no longer needed to understand the physical intricacies of chip layout. Earlier, it happened with software&#8211;when computers got enough speed and memory, programmers didn&#8217;t need to know as much about the internal workings of the machine. The process is reversible, though, because new applications may arise where the underlying technology gets pushed so hard that designers have to know how it works in some detail.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter</title>
		<link>http://cultureby.com/2006/05/design_dynamism.html/comment-page-1#comment-4525</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 May 2006 09:01:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost/wp_culture/?p=702#comment-4525</guid>
		<description>One of the interesting consequences of the rise of the video games industry was that it gave gainful employment to guys who could visualize well but not verbalize.  Until then, to be a computer programmer, one HAD to be text-oriented (remember FORTRAN and DOS, anyone?).  The video games industry has helped reduce the domination of the verbal and textual in our culture, in a million ways, A Good Thing.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One of the interesting consequences of the rise of the video games industry was that it gave gainful employment to guys who could visualize well but not verbalize.  Until then, to be a computer programmer, one HAD to be text-oriented (remember FORTRAN and DOS, anyone?).  The video games industry has helped reduce the domination of the verbal and textual in our culture, in a million ways, A Good Thing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom Guarriello</title>
		<link>http://cultureby.com/2006/05/design_dynamism.html/comment-page-1#comment-4524</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom Guarriello</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 May 2006 08:37:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost/wp_culture/?p=702#comment-4524</guid>
		<description>Well, I thought my point was slightly more nuanced, but I&#039;m often mistaken in thinking so. What I meant was, the worst are either gone, or in hiding. They still show themselves when they sense a new idea&#039;s in trouble, but they are not as reflexively &quot;anti-&quot; as I&#039;ve seen in the past. As Graham ably points out, the complexities of individual organizations (and individual individuals) make generalizations perilous, I see patterns emerging in the companies with which I work. I&#039;d describe it as: the new has won the day. Simplistic, I know, but, in my experience, a shift in mindset.
Organizational politics will always play a role in how new ideas are embraced (or not) and executed. Watch the winners; they&#039;ll show us something about how it&#039;s done, but never all of how it&#039;s done. It&#039;s like the early days when American car makers wanted to tour Toyota assembly plants. American execs were amazed that Toyota permitted them to do so. When asked why, a Toyota exec was reported to have said something like, &quot;Because you can&#039;t copy the thing that makes our system work, our company&#039;s culture.&quot;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, I thought my point was slightly more nuanced, but I&#8217;m often mistaken in thinking so. What I meant was, the worst are either gone, or in hiding. They still show themselves when they sense a new idea&#8217;s in trouble, but they are not as reflexively &#8220;anti-&#8221; as I&#8217;ve seen in the past. As Graham ably points out, the complexities of individual organizations (and individual individuals) make generalizations perilous, I see patterns emerging in the companies with which I work. I&#8217;d describe it as: the new has won the day. Simplistic, I know, but, in my experience, a shift in mindset.</p>
<p>Organizational politics will always play a role in how new ideas are embraced (or not) and executed. Watch the winners; they&#8217;ll show us something about how it&#8217;s done, but never all of how it&#8217;s done. It&#8217;s like the early days when American car makers wanted to tour Toyota assembly plants. American execs were amazed that Toyota permitted them to do so. When asked why, a Toyota exec was reported to have said something like, &#8220;Because you can&#8217;t copy the thing that makes our system work, our company&#8217;s culture.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Graham Hill</title>
		<link>http://cultureby.com/2006/05/design_dynamism.html/comment-page-1#comment-4523</link>
		<dc:creator>Graham Hill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 May 2006 01:04:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost/wp_culture/?p=702#comment-4523</guid>
		<description>Grant
I have told you a million times before, don&#039;t exaggerate!
Corporations are by definition complex adaptive systems, just as the markets in which they exist are, work goups within them are and the individuals within the work groups are (at a biological level anyway). But organisations have a number of factors that make spotting emerging patterns harder, both inside the organisation if you want to nudge it into changing and outside the organisation if you want to nudge markets to change.
One of the big factors inside the BMW organisation is internal politics and the greasy pole. Internal politics prevents BMW from being all that it can be.
I recently ran a business seminar at BMW, at their request. The people were all friendly, competent and driven, but internal politics was evident everywhere. Particularly the politics associated with BMW knows best and senior management knows best of all. It prevented direct discussion of the one big problem I was there to help them think about. I decided that I didn&#039;t want to do any more work with BMW at that point.
The brand may exist as feelings in the mind of the customer (as Tom Asacker points out), but the whole organisation has a role to play in delivering a superior branded experience for the customer which creates those feelings (as John Aaker points out). The real BMW is much more (or much less) than the sum of a few glossy ads. And it could be much more than it is today. If only internal politics didn&#039;t get in the way.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Grant</p>
<p>I have told you a million times before, don&#8217;t exaggerate!</p>
<p>Corporations are by definition complex adaptive systems, just as the markets in which they exist are, work goups within them are and the individuals within the work groups are (at a biological level anyway). But organisations have a number of factors that make spotting emerging patterns harder, both inside the organisation if you want to nudge it into changing and outside the organisation if you want to nudge markets to change.</p>
<p>One of the big factors inside the BMW organisation is internal politics and the greasy pole. Internal politics prevents BMW from being all that it can be.</p>
<p>I recently ran a business seminar at BMW, at their request. The people were all friendly, competent and driven, but internal politics was evident everywhere. Particularly the politics associated with BMW knows best and senior management knows best of all. It prevented direct discussion of the one big problem I was there to help them think about. I decided that I didn&#8217;t want to do any more work with BMW at that point.</p>
<p>The brand may exist as feelings in the mind of the customer (as Tom Asacker points out), but the whole organisation has a role to play in delivering a superior branded experience for the customer which creates those feelings (as John Aaker points out). The real BMW is much more (or much less) than the sum of a few glossy ads. And it could be much more than it is today. If only internal politics didn&#8217;t get in the way.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

