More praise for design constraints
Some time ago in this column[1] I argued that constraints - be they constraints related to time, money, memory, disk space or whatever - can have a positive affect on the amount of innovation juice flowing through your average engineer.
I have since had cause to ponder the power of constraints again. This time, my focus has been on the power of constraints to facilitate change in corporate structures, rationalizing existing workflows, re-engineering existing work practices and so on.
Imagine a scenario where an organization has an existing business unit that is not working so well. Perhaps it takes too long to execute customer requests. Perhaps it is too expensive to operate. Perhaps it cannot handle the demands of new market conditions. Perhaps the quality of product is not high enough. Whatever.
The business unit hires some IT folk to see if computerization can help....
I pause here for a reason. The cracking sound you heard in the background is the sound of the universe forking into three separate universes. In the first universe, the business unit hires developers with low level (but highly flexible) skills related to programming languages, GUI design etc. In the second, the business unit hires developers skilled in a high level (but limited) business application toolset. The third universe is where we now stand, commenting on the fates of the other two...
In the first universe, the developers - quite justifiably - claim that they can automate anything that can be expressed in terms of logic. No matter how crazy or complex an existing business process is, it can be computerized with their tools. It may take a long time, but it can be done.
In the second universe, the developers know that their toolset can produce results quickly but only if the business processes being automated fit common patterns. Their tools are really good, for example, if a problem can be reduced to a combination of tabular data entry, data storage, data modification and data reporting. The developers know that if (when) the existing business processes get crazy or complex the tools can run out of steam.
In the first universe, the theoretical lack of constraint has a way of veering attention away from improving existing business processes through rationalization. It tends to focus all efforts of improving the existing process - however baroque - by computerizing it.
In the second universe, the clear and present constraints manifested by the application framework have a way of veering attention towards changing existing business processes. Changing aspects of how things are currently done may be the only sane way to computerize the process as a whole.
Sign up for ITworld's Daily newsletter
Follow ITworld on Twitter @IT_world
jfruh
Apple syncing patent can't come soon enough
pasmith
New Twitter features borrow from 3rd party clients
Esther Schindler
Open Source Changes the Software Acquisition Process
mikelgan
How to set up continuous podcast play on the new iTunes
David Strom
Five important Windows 7 mobility features
sjvn
Guard your Wi-Fi for your own sake
Sandra Henry-Stocker
Grepping on Whole Words
Sidekick: The Good News & the Bad News
Either way you look at it Microsoft Data Center management did not follow standards or best practices in this failure. In which case it makes me wonder more about the outsourcing of corporate data much less personal data.
- mburton325
Join the conversation here
Quick, practical advice for IT pros. Made fresh daily.
Want to cash in on your IT savvy? Send your tip to tips@itworld.com. If we post it, we'll send you a $25 Amazon e-gift card.













