[TheForge] [Bulk] Re: rant concerning quality of products (Getting way OT )

[Andrew Vida]

Bruce Freeman wrote:
> One thing I've learned over the
> years is that however strongly I may believe something, that doesn't
> mean I'm right.  (That applies to other people, too!)

	The difference between us is that I *am* right.

	Waaaaa haa haa haa haa haa...
> 
> So, remember that nothing that appears on this forum is anything more
> than letters on "paper."  Maybe someday someone will come up with
> euphemism software that takes any incoming text and converts "hell" to
> "heck", etc.  Until then, I suggest you do that mentally and simply
> not read objectionable words.

	Holy shi^H^H^H... erm... *heck*!  Another million dollar idea!  I'm 
serious... wanna bet you could make money on such a thing?
> 
> More to the point, I'd like to recount a few experiences of my own in
> a now-defunct company that elucidate my reasons for blaming
> management, not the worker.
> 
> The company was Electronic Associates Inc., of West Long Branch, NJ.
> I'd been hired on as an expert in gas chromatography, but that was a
> minor product line.  Basically EAI was THE premier manufacturer of
> analog computers and hybrid (digitally-controlled analog) computers in
> the world.
> 
> In our first chapter, we consider the machine shop versus the bean
> counters.  EAI had a machine shop with some fairly nice metalworking
> equipment and staff who knew how to run them.  Initially, the machine
> shop had an overhead account to charge for such things as equipment
> maintenance and idle time (when no work was in the shop).  Then the
> bean counters (accountants, and the idiot managers who employ them)
> decided that ALL machine shop work should be charged to projects.

	From the managerial accounting standpoint, this actually makes good 
sense because it allows you to get a grip on actual expenses.  The key 
is diong it correctly, which by your description was not the case. 
OTOH, I prefer overhead accounts as you describe because they are 
simpler and don't smack of obsessive "optimization" of profit, which can 
go too far.  I find it amusing how the hidden damaging effects of this 
systemic neurosis is rarely if ever addressed - not to mention the 
factor of diminishing returns.  These accounting techniques work well 
for certain sorts of business and not so well for others.  Seems that 
the bandwagon mentality takes over en-masse and everyone has to be doing 
it even with those who have little understanding of the process or how 
it applies to them.   "Oh jeez... we need a SYSTEM... hurry... get out 
the checkbook..."  I've seen this more than once.  Some people are very 
panic-oriented.

> 
>  But that's not all.  Consider the "motivational managers"

	Oh jeeez... not *them*.

> I understand (and can't document) that the Harvard business school
> taught that a good manager could manage anything.  Unfortunately, they
> apparently never turned out a "good manager."

	I'd say that is not quite fair or accurate.  I've known and worked with 
some fabulously capable managers.  I'm a pretty decent one myself.  It 
seems to me that there are several differentiating factors that separate 
the good from the bad and ugly.  Backbone is one - not falling for 
bullshit fads is another - there are quite a few of them that, when put 
together properly, results in effective management.  OTOH, if the 
corporate environment is of a certain character, no measure of 
managerial adroitness will help.  If the people at the top are on a bad 
agenda, the "good" managers below will be faced with a choice - toe the 
line or not.  If you do, you collect a check.  If you don't, you may 
still collect a check, but definitely risk losing that ability once it 
is discovered you are not a "team player".  It is a bit discouraging to 
watch really good and dedicated people get pushed aside in favor of the 
morally-free laggards who smooch the right body parts and tell the right 
lies as they sail to the top.  So, as you see, there is cannibalism 
within the ranks of management as well - the point being that your 
bright line between management and "workers" is really  nonexistent. 
The real line is drawn between the clueless/corrupt and the 
clued-in/honest - the latter often taking it in the neck, methinks, 
because they are just not nearly as treacherous.