Hi Dale<br><br>Perhaps i should have made one thing clear<br><br>We have been working with insurance companies for some time now, due to the ever increasing lawsuits that are resulting across the country with regard to telecommunications integration project failures and what we are trying to do is come up with a set of quality assurance best practices that WORK.<br>
<br>Its not rocket science but what we have seen in the majority of project disasters is a big rush to DO something and huge technology hype confusion without s set of common sense guidelines.<br><br>Its been nearly 10 years since we had the leapfrog conference in Santa Fe <a href="http://www.ideapete.com/leapfrog.html">http://www.ideapete.com/leapfrog.html</a> and we are further behind today than we were then.<br>
<br>We all know the disastrous projects that consumed millions in Sandoval and Rio Rancho and Albuqerque but sadly it looks like we have not learn anything from them except chuck money out the window and hope for success.<br>
<br>What our clients, the insurance companies, are hoping to do is get some best practice knowledge out there, so that these projects will for once work without multiple entities suing one another ( as they are already threatening to do before the project has even started ) <br>
<br>( : ( : pete<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 2:00 PM, Dale Carstensen <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dlc@lampinc.com" target="_blank">dlc@lampinc.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">>Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 13:28:16 -0700<br>
>To: <a href="mailto:1st-mile-nm@mailman.dcn.org" target="_blank">1st-mile-nm@mailman.dcn.org</a><br>
>From: peter baston <<a href="mailto:pete@ideapete.com" target="_blank">pete@ideapete.com</a>><br>
>Subject: Re: [1st-mile-nm] Santa Fe Telecom Ordinance + CityLink Fiber<br>
<br>
Pete,<br>
<br>
Thanks for posting a message that at least has a text/plain alternative.<br>
I was getting a little peeved at your text/html-only postings.<br>
<br>
Oh. Do you suppose your SWOT could benefit by adding one more letter,<br>
C for cost or P for price? I'd go for risk, reward and cost as a three-<br>
legged stool myself, and any of the three can be either side of zero.<br>
That is, not every idea has risk -- sometimes they reduce risk. And<br>
the key is to try to be comprehensive, but I suppose we always forget<br>
to include something that turns out later to be important, probably more<br>
important than anything we did remember to include in a plan. So we<br>
should know when to stop the intellectual and political exercises and<br>
just do something.<br>
<br>
And I think in general governments are getting too far off to the side<br>
away from normal or wise by trying to make everything perfect. Making<br>
things safer can go too far, making projects cost-prohibitive or no<br>
longer worth pursuing. There's an element of power-grabbing, or<br>
control-freak-ism, in that, too. I think we should reverse the trend,<br>
go toward more freedom and creativity, and less credential-ism. More<br>
accomplishment and less study after study, hiring of consultants, wasting<br>
money and time on paper that has words on it worth less than the paper.<br>
Maybe even disk space that has words on it worth less than the disk<br>
space, which is hard to do, but common with government these days.<br>
<br>
In 2008, I came up with a catch phrase, "In your making everything perfect,<br>
there will be lessons." I see no reason to adopt a new one yet. I<br>
should have adopted that one several years, perhaps a couple of decades,<br>
sooner.<br>
<br>
Dale<br>
662-3691<br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>--------------------------------------<br>Peter Baston<br>IDEAS business technology integration<br><a href="http://www.ideapete.com" target="_blank">www.ideapete.com</a><br>
Cell: 505-690-3627<br>
Mailto:<a href="mailto:pete@ideapete.com" target="_blank">pete@ideapete.com</a><br>