<?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: It is about people; not the technology</title>
	<atom:link href="http://eicolab.com.au/2008/01/31/it-is-about-people-not-the-technology/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://eicolab.com.au/2008/01/31/it-is-about-people-not-the-technology/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Mar 2010 16:24:33 +1100</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Zern</title>
		<link>http://eicolab.com.au/2008/01/31/it-is-about-people-not-the-technology/comment-page-1/#comment-342</link>
		<dc:creator>Zern</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Feb 2008 03:56:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://eicolab.com.au/2008/01/31/it-is-about-people-not-the-technology/#comment-342</guid>
		<description>Agree - ideally we need to get ALL the aspects right.

I do see an overwhelming imbalance &quot;out there&quot; - the focus is still very much on the tools, and too little too late on the human side. I can also understand why: human stuff is messy and yucky and hard to measure. Tools are easier to spec out, list, compare logical features, measure throughput and so on. 

I would suggest that when you have committed happy people, they can do amazing things even with crappy tools. Look at all the great NGOs with second rate tools. Or put another way - look at what a few terrorists can do with crappy home made explosives...

Yes, I would love to see good people practices combined with good tools. Not many businesses are even close to that point. Certainly tool vendors are not encouraging it. PCs are still being sold on clock speed and hard disk size, software is still sold by check boxes of features.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Agree &#8211; ideally we need to get ALL the aspects right.</p>
<p>I do see an overwhelming imbalance &#8220;out there&#8221; &#8211; the focus is still very much on the tools, and too little too late on the human side. I can also understand why: human stuff is messy and yucky and hard to measure. Tools are easier to spec out, list, compare logical features, measure throughput and so on. </p>
<p>I would suggest that when you have committed happy people, they can do amazing things even with crappy tools. Look at all the great NGOs with second rate tools. Or put another way &#8211; look at what a few terrorists can do with crappy home made explosives&#8230;</p>
<p>Yes, I would love to see good people practices combined with good tools. Not many businesses are even close to that point. Certainly tool vendors are not encouraging it. PCs are still being sold on clock speed and hard disk size, software is still sold by check boxes of features.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonathan Keasy</title>
		<link>http://eicolab.com.au/2008/01/31/it-is-about-people-not-the-technology/comment-page-1/#comment-341</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan Keasy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Feb 2008 00:25:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://eicolab.com.au/2008/01/31/it-is-about-people-not-the-technology/#comment-341</guid>
		<description>If we&#039;re going off the pre-condition that there has to be a focus, then I would suggest focussing on getting all aspects right as opposed to one enabler over the others. Focussing on one aspect more than another will only lead to imbalanced - even second-rate - results. 

E.g. if the human element gets all/most of the attention (in terms of perfecting the reward schemes, making sure everyone is happy - which is practically impossible in many environments) and let&#039;s say we don&#039;t pay as much attention to the selection of the technology or the vendor(s) involved , in this event, we&#039;d probably end up with a bunch of happy &amp; excited user-base, and a technology that falls short of solving the problem(s) at hand (maybe the systems crash often or the software was not well-designed etc). That would equal a bunch of unhappy users in my books and a failed project!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If we&#8217;re going off the pre-condition that there has to be a focus, then I would suggest focussing on getting all aspects right as opposed to one enabler over the others. Focussing on one aspect more than another will only lead to imbalanced &#8211; even second-rate &#8211; results. </p>
<p>E.g. if the human element gets all/most of the attention (in terms of perfecting the reward schemes, making sure everyone is happy &#8211; which is practically impossible in many environments) and let&#8217;s say we don&#8217;t pay as much attention to the selection of the technology or the vendor(s) involved , in this event, we&#8217;d probably end up with a bunch of happy &amp; excited user-base, and a technology that falls short of solving the problem(s) at hand (maybe the systems crash often or the software was not well-designed etc). That would equal a bunch of unhappy users in my books and a failed project!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Zern</title>
		<link>http://eicolab.com.au/2008/01/31/it-is-about-people-not-the-technology/comment-page-1/#comment-340</link>
		<dc:creator>Zern</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Feb 2008 02:06:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://eicolab.com.au/2008/01/31/it-is-about-people-not-the-technology/#comment-340</guid>
		<description>I stand by the fundamental point - nothing matters if you don&#039;t get the people stuff right. So therefore, the people stuff is the most important.

The best technology, most efficient workflow design, nicest furniture... are actually irrelevant if the people do not want to be present for whatever reason.

Of course, it doesn&#039;t mean that we can completely ignore the tools. The problems come when we make the tools the focus.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I stand by the fundamental point &#8211; nothing matters if you don&#8217;t get the people stuff right. So therefore, the people stuff is the most important.</p>
<p>The best technology, most efficient workflow design, nicest furniture&#8230; are actually irrelevant if the people do not want to be present for whatever reason.</p>
<p>Of course, it doesn&#8217;t mean that we can completely ignore the tools. The problems come when we make the tools the focus.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonathan Keasy</title>
		<link>http://eicolab.com.au/2008/01/31/it-is-about-people-not-the-technology/comment-page-1/#comment-339</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan Keasy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Feb 2008 00:26:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://eicolab.com.au/2008/01/31/it-is-about-people-not-the-technology/#comment-339</guid>
		<description>I take issue to the title of this post (and the post from the site you referenced aswell). It&#039;s not just about the people nor is it just about the technology. It&#039;s actually about BOTH (and more). They are both *equally* important.

The other key enablers of business processes are: policies/rules, workflow design, measurement and facilities/operating environment (i.e. physical infrastructure where the process operates ~ furniture, lighting etc).

Business processes sit one layer underneath an organisation&#039;s strategy, goals and objectives. They support them accordingly. The enablers support the processes accordingly.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I take issue to the title of this post (and the post from the site you referenced aswell). It&#8217;s not just about the people nor is it just about the technology. It&#8217;s actually about BOTH (and more). They are both *equally* important.</p>
<p>The other key enablers of business processes are: policies/rules, workflow design, measurement and facilities/operating environment (i.e. physical infrastructure where the process operates ~ furniture, lighting etc).</p>
<p>Business processes sit one layer underneath an organisation&#8217;s strategy, goals and objectives. They support them accordingly. The enablers support the processes accordingly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
