Management Speak / Talking Bolleaux
"What is your methodology?" = "How do you do that?"
"But surely the neo-asymptotic region of the normal distribution curve at the 6-sigma extreme would indicate that extrapolation of our core-business methodology beyond a 2- or 3-sigma level would prove both nugatory and financially imprudent?"
Go on - try that the next time someone quacks up with the 6-sigma w@nkword!
Summation of sigma - wouldn't that be sigma sigma?
I hated statistics at university about 35 years ago. But I remember on economics session in my final year when the lecturer said "Let's say it costs £N to get something 90% right. OK for car engines, not OK for nuclear power stations. It'll probably cost as much again to make it 99% right, the same again for 99.9% right. So the economist has to advise the manager about how much his strive for perfection will cost and not waste money on trying to make cars as reliable as nuclear power stations!"
OK - so this was long before Chernobyl. But it was the era of the Austin Allegro - the only car ever sold with a square wheel!
"But surely the neo-asymptotic region of the normal distribution curve at the 6-sigma extreme would indicate that extrapolation of our core-business methodology beyond a 2- or 3-sigma level would prove both nugatory and financially imprudent?"
Go on - try that the next time someone quacks up with the 6-sigma w@nkword!
Summation of sigma - wouldn't that be sigma sigma?
I hated statistics at university about 35 years ago. But I remember on economics session in my final year when the lecturer said "Let's say it costs £N to get something 90% right. OK for car engines, not OK for nuclear power stations. It'll probably cost as much again to make it 99% right, the same again for 99.9% right. So the economist has to advise the manager about how much his strive for perfection will cost and not waste money on trying to make cars as reliable as nuclear power stations!"
OK - so this was long before Chernobyl. But it was the era of the Austin Allegro - the only car ever sold with a square wheel!
Last edited by BEagle; 20th Sep 2005 at 21:44.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: pillar to post.
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To "blue sky" it for a moment...
Job title inflation is also amusing. Have you noticed how there are no secretaries anymore, just PAs? Trolly-dollies are PR executives. Blokes who paste billboards? Marketing consultants. Plumbers are hydraulic systems engineers. As a 16 year old I got a job in Burger King, telling them that my previous employment had been as a journalistic material distribution engineer. They seemed quite impressed.
Job title inflation is also amusing. Have you noticed how there are no secretaries anymore, just PAs? Trolly-dollies are PR executives. Blokes who paste billboards? Marketing consultants. Plumbers are hydraulic systems engineers. As a 16 year old I got a job in Burger King, telling them that my previous employment had been as a journalistic material distribution engineer. They seemed quite impressed.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem is, none of you are adopting a holistic methodology to underpin your strategic vision. We require crunchy granularity across the piste to ensure management processes overcome the perma-frost of resistance to change. Once core outputs have been identified and the POR has LEANED the HQ, we can employ SMART pull LEAN push to engender a minimised deployability footprint whist maximising output efficiencies! Rustication will allow key enablers to empower staffs at the lowest levels thus ensuring line managers employ direct filtration methods to enhance business processes!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Scotland
Posts: 664
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airdrop - Classic
Having the 'second sight', I see a fast track to the heights of MoD for you. You'll be able to engage consultants by the dozen so that you can collectively baffle lesser mortals.
Just remember that the value of a consultant's advice is in direct proportion to the size of his fee. I kid you not - once had a consultancy produce a report into a problem advising the same solution that every swinging-dick, from the PSA technician to the Stn Cdr, could see was the only practicable solution. Cost of report: £1.5K. MoD's response: Report discounted - "We would expect a valid consultation on a project of this size to cost at least £40K"!
I wonder when some junior exec / jnr offr will actually point out that the Emperor's bolleaux are on show, perhaps at some grand briefing, and ask for an explanation in demotic Anglo-Saxon. I imagine the silence and coughing could win a cheating Major a million quid.
Having the 'second sight', I see a fast track to the heights of MoD for you. You'll be able to engage consultants by the dozen so that you can collectively baffle lesser mortals.
Just remember that the value of a consultant's advice is in direct proportion to the size of his fee. I kid you not - once had a consultancy produce a report into a problem advising the same solution that every swinging-dick, from the PSA technician to the Stn Cdr, could see was the only practicable solution. Cost of report: £1.5K. MoD's response: Report discounted - "We would expect a valid consultation on a project of this size to cost at least £40K"!
I wonder when some junior exec / jnr offr will actually point out that the Emperor's bolleaux are on show, perhaps at some grand briefing, and ask for an explanation in demotic Anglo-Saxon. I imagine the silence and coughing could win a cheating Major a million quid.
Oh what a wonderful thread!
I can wholly recommend a visit to this site: www.potfire.com.au/entertain/wwbingo.htm .
I can wholly recommend a visit to this site: www.potfire.com.au/entertain/wwbingo.htm .
Gentleman Aviator
stop using an unnecessary 'ology'.
.... glad I mentioned 6 Sigma then .......
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: OTA E
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chaps,
I pinched this from ARRSE, where it was posted by 'GROWNUPS_BEWARE'. It is an absolute classic.
STAFF GUIDANCE ON DEFENCE RESTRUCTURING
1. This guidance is being issued to remedy a perceived difficulty experienced by Staff at all levels in understanding the rationale behind recent Defence re-structuring. In particular many Staff Officers seem not to understand how reducing the numbers of aircraft, ships, tanks, artillery and soldiers results in a more flexible, robust and effective fighting force.
2. In particular it seems that much of the confusion stems from a systemic misunderstanding of the correct use of military terminology. A list of common terms and actual meanings follows.
3. In addition there follows an explanation of the key assumptions embedded within the Defence Review. All Staff Officers are encouraged to seek clarification through their Chain of Command if they still have any questions.
4. Staff Terminology used in the new Defence Plan;
Term MOD meaning
Flexible- a. Smaller
b. Unable to operate unless under US protection
Robust- a. Smaller
b. Lacking reserves or regeneration capability
Networked- Smaller, but still unable to talk to each other
Capable- Smaller
Agile- Really, really small
Deployability- Method of making the Forces, primarily the Army, able to send higher percentages of their manpower to a distant location. This is achieved by reducing the overall numbers involved, i.e. ?In future the Army will be able to send 50% of it?s manpower to Africa in the back of a Cessna, thus achieving greater deployability?.
Reach- The distance the American?s are willing to fly us
Efficient- Much, much smaller
Streamlined- Just unbelievably small
Just in time- For the funeral.
Integrated- Process by which all three services get to brief against each other in public leaks, attempting to justify and defend their own budget against cuts, thereby doing the Treasury?s work for them. Taken to extremes by the Army in which Corps and Regiments fight each other, and perfected within the Infantry.
Technically ambitious- a. Slang, as in ?He was being a bit technically ambitious when he tried to drive that car through the wall? (cf, ?To propose a Bowman?)
b. Description of the far future
Reserves- Integral part of current Operational Manning.
Rationalisation- a. Cuts
b. Psychological term, meaning to use complicated arguments to avoid facing unpalatable truths, i.e. , ?we don?t need to pay for both expensive servicemen and equipment, because we will be networked, agile, and technically ambitious? .
Rapid- Used in a comparative sense, as in ?The rapid erosion of the Himalayan Mountains??
Modernisation- Cuts
Radical- Deep Cuts
Transformation- Really Deep Cuts
Sustainable- Assuming zero casualties, no leave and no emergencies.
Sentences such as ?these proposals capture our aim for a speedy deployable, agile, joint and integrated, technically ambitious defence capability? will make more logical sense to the experienced Staff Officer once the above definitions are applied.
4. It will also help if Staff Officer?s bear in mind the following Planning Principles. Point C will be of particular relevance in explaining the rationale behind restructuring to Junior Staff.
a. Use of Special Forces. No one in the general Public has a clue how many there are, so they can be announced as deploying to every country in the world.
b. Aggressive use of terminology can compensate for lack of actual forces. For example in the past effective deterrence of a reasonably capable Maritime threat would require the despatch of a task force, consisting of destroyers, frigates, submarines and possibly even a carrier. In the future this task will still be achieved by a task force; but task-force will be the new description for a mine-sweeper.
c. The new Defence Plan was not resource driven. A comprehensive strategic estimate was conducted, from first principles, identifying the current and potential threats to the UK and it?s interests, allowing a reserve for the unexpected, and also allowing for recurrent non-warfighting tasks such as Fire Strike cover and Foot and Mouth disease. Against the tasks identified an ideal manpower establishment and Task Org was then identified. By an amazing coincidence it happened to fit almost exactly within current Treasury MOD expenditure plans, and even allow the MOD to carry half the costs of Iraq and Afghanistan.
d. Much of the current crisis in Defence Spending can be directly traced to the high costs of legacy equipments. These were ordered at a time of ignorance in the past when Planners naively seemed to believe that the threat they identified as imminent would remain the same for the 20-30 year service life of the equipment they were ordering. The assumption in the 1980?s and 90?s that tanks, artillery, and aircraft would be needed in the future was ridiculous, as none of these equipments have been used by the British Armed forces to any degree since the Falklands war.
However, current planners possess better foresight and are able to predict future threats for at least the next 40 years. We are therefore able to be certain that Britain is unlikely to need any tanks, aircraft, submarines etc. past about 2015.
e. Britain no longer needs a significant anti-submarine capability. No other nation possesses submarines in any numbers, submarine technology is unlikely to advance at all over the next few 30 years, and should anti-submarine technology or skills be required at any point in the future they can be reconstituted overnight from the reserves. (Once the reserves have been reconstituted). In any case by 2020 the UK will be fully integrated into mainland Europe, and will therefore no longer have a coastline to defend or be reliant upon sea-supply.
f. Similar arguments apply to air defence.
g. The Regimental System. In the past the Regimental System has been seen as the corner-stone of British Military success, creating a system in which the individual is made to feel part of a greater family, often stretching back hundreds of years, in which he is nurtured and developed, and to which he feels such great loyalty that he is inspired to sacrifice himself if need be for his Regimental comrades. However, the British youth of today are so naturally self-sacrificing and community spirited that additional incentives are now unnecessary, and in any case the threat to soldiers on the ground has been assumed away. There is therefore no further need for a system whose main purpose is to generate fighting spirit, and it can be safely emasculated to achieve administrative efficiency (see ?Efficient? above).
h. High divorce rates within the Services will solve manpower crises, by ensuring all service personnel will be happy to conduct back-to-back tours forever, as no one will have any families or friends to miss.
i. Savings will be ploughed into the purchase of large numbers of hats. This will be essential as in future everyone will be at least treble or quadruple hatted. Wars will be fought in rotation on a strict ?first come, first served? basis.
k. Future savings will be made by abolishing all training for the Chiefs of Staff. After all they haven?t proven remotely as effective at manoeuvre warfare, disruption, dislocation or divide-and-rule as the Treasury.
l. Successive efficiency measures can be made to reinforce each other. For example, each time troop numbers are cut, a unit can then be tasked to conduct the same jobs as before. Provided there are no actual massacres of Friendly Forces, the new troop numbers can be seen to have been fully as effective as the previous numbers, and so can form a baseline for achieving efficiency cuts to new troop numbers. Savings can then be invested in new equipment, in the same way that British Airways fires half its pilots every time it needs to buy a new plane. The ultimate aim is to have one man, but equipped like Dr Octopus. He will sleep with one eye open at all times to replicate full manning.
m. Key Assumptions: Current levels of operations are an aberration, will never be repeated, and should form no guide to current manning requirements, let alone future ones. Gerry Adams has embraced peace, there is no more requirement for crowd control in Northern Ireland, the FBU have forsworn strikes along with all other key public workers, Osama Bin Laden is about to hand himself in and the Easter Bunny will be providing Area Air Defence for London.
5. More detailed guidance can be found in JSP 4708- ?Magic Mushrooms, their consumption, effects and results in the MOD? and Minister Hoon?s Autobiography ?What Colour is the Sky in My World??
{CHOtS SIGNED}
I M Promoted
SO2 Spin
Ministry of Truth
Orwell Bldg
MOD 1984
Regards
BM
I pinched this from ARRSE, where it was posted by 'GROWNUPS_BEWARE'. It is an absolute classic.
STAFF GUIDANCE ON DEFENCE RESTRUCTURING
1. This guidance is being issued to remedy a perceived difficulty experienced by Staff at all levels in understanding the rationale behind recent Defence re-structuring. In particular many Staff Officers seem not to understand how reducing the numbers of aircraft, ships, tanks, artillery and soldiers results in a more flexible, robust and effective fighting force.
2. In particular it seems that much of the confusion stems from a systemic misunderstanding of the correct use of military terminology. A list of common terms and actual meanings follows.
3. In addition there follows an explanation of the key assumptions embedded within the Defence Review. All Staff Officers are encouraged to seek clarification through their Chain of Command if they still have any questions.
4. Staff Terminology used in the new Defence Plan;
Term MOD meaning
Flexible- a. Smaller
b. Unable to operate unless under US protection
Robust- a. Smaller
b. Lacking reserves or regeneration capability
Networked- Smaller, but still unable to talk to each other
Capable- Smaller
Agile- Really, really small
Deployability- Method of making the Forces, primarily the Army, able to send higher percentages of their manpower to a distant location. This is achieved by reducing the overall numbers involved, i.e. ?In future the Army will be able to send 50% of it?s manpower to Africa in the back of a Cessna, thus achieving greater deployability?.
Reach- The distance the American?s are willing to fly us
Efficient- Much, much smaller
Streamlined- Just unbelievably small
Just in time- For the funeral.
Integrated- Process by which all three services get to brief against each other in public leaks, attempting to justify and defend their own budget against cuts, thereby doing the Treasury?s work for them. Taken to extremes by the Army in which Corps and Regiments fight each other, and perfected within the Infantry.
Technically ambitious- a. Slang, as in ?He was being a bit technically ambitious when he tried to drive that car through the wall? (cf, ?To propose a Bowman?)
b. Description of the far future
Reserves- Integral part of current Operational Manning.
Rationalisation- a. Cuts
b. Psychological term, meaning to use complicated arguments to avoid facing unpalatable truths, i.e. , ?we don?t need to pay for both expensive servicemen and equipment, because we will be networked, agile, and technically ambitious? .
Rapid- Used in a comparative sense, as in ?The rapid erosion of the Himalayan Mountains??
Modernisation- Cuts
Radical- Deep Cuts
Transformation- Really Deep Cuts
Sustainable- Assuming zero casualties, no leave and no emergencies.
Sentences such as ?these proposals capture our aim for a speedy deployable, agile, joint and integrated, technically ambitious defence capability? will make more logical sense to the experienced Staff Officer once the above definitions are applied.
4. It will also help if Staff Officer?s bear in mind the following Planning Principles. Point C will be of particular relevance in explaining the rationale behind restructuring to Junior Staff.
a. Use of Special Forces. No one in the general Public has a clue how many there are, so they can be announced as deploying to every country in the world.
b. Aggressive use of terminology can compensate for lack of actual forces. For example in the past effective deterrence of a reasonably capable Maritime threat would require the despatch of a task force, consisting of destroyers, frigates, submarines and possibly even a carrier. In the future this task will still be achieved by a task force; but task-force will be the new description for a mine-sweeper.
c. The new Defence Plan was not resource driven. A comprehensive strategic estimate was conducted, from first principles, identifying the current and potential threats to the UK and it?s interests, allowing a reserve for the unexpected, and also allowing for recurrent non-warfighting tasks such as Fire Strike cover and Foot and Mouth disease. Against the tasks identified an ideal manpower establishment and Task Org was then identified. By an amazing coincidence it happened to fit almost exactly within current Treasury MOD expenditure plans, and even allow the MOD to carry half the costs of Iraq and Afghanistan.
d. Much of the current crisis in Defence Spending can be directly traced to the high costs of legacy equipments. These were ordered at a time of ignorance in the past when Planners naively seemed to believe that the threat they identified as imminent would remain the same for the 20-30 year service life of the equipment they were ordering. The assumption in the 1980?s and 90?s that tanks, artillery, and aircraft would be needed in the future was ridiculous, as none of these equipments have been used by the British Armed forces to any degree since the Falklands war.
However, current planners possess better foresight and are able to predict future threats for at least the next 40 years. We are therefore able to be certain that Britain is unlikely to need any tanks, aircraft, submarines etc. past about 2015.
e. Britain no longer needs a significant anti-submarine capability. No other nation possesses submarines in any numbers, submarine technology is unlikely to advance at all over the next few 30 years, and should anti-submarine technology or skills be required at any point in the future they can be reconstituted overnight from the reserves. (Once the reserves have been reconstituted). In any case by 2020 the UK will be fully integrated into mainland Europe, and will therefore no longer have a coastline to defend or be reliant upon sea-supply.
f. Similar arguments apply to air defence.
g. The Regimental System. In the past the Regimental System has been seen as the corner-stone of British Military success, creating a system in which the individual is made to feel part of a greater family, often stretching back hundreds of years, in which he is nurtured and developed, and to which he feels such great loyalty that he is inspired to sacrifice himself if need be for his Regimental comrades. However, the British youth of today are so naturally self-sacrificing and community spirited that additional incentives are now unnecessary, and in any case the threat to soldiers on the ground has been assumed away. There is therefore no further need for a system whose main purpose is to generate fighting spirit, and it can be safely emasculated to achieve administrative efficiency (see ?Efficient? above).
h. High divorce rates within the Services will solve manpower crises, by ensuring all service personnel will be happy to conduct back-to-back tours forever, as no one will have any families or friends to miss.
i. Savings will be ploughed into the purchase of large numbers of hats. This will be essential as in future everyone will be at least treble or quadruple hatted. Wars will be fought in rotation on a strict ?first come, first served? basis.
k. Future savings will be made by abolishing all training for the Chiefs of Staff. After all they haven?t proven remotely as effective at manoeuvre warfare, disruption, dislocation or divide-and-rule as the Treasury.
l. Successive efficiency measures can be made to reinforce each other. For example, each time troop numbers are cut, a unit can then be tasked to conduct the same jobs as before. Provided there are no actual massacres of Friendly Forces, the new troop numbers can be seen to have been fully as effective as the previous numbers, and so can form a baseline for achieving efficiency cuts to new troop numbers. Savings can then be invested in new equipment, in the same way that British Airways fires half its pilots every time it needs to buy a new plane. The ultimate aim is to have one man, but equipped like Dr Octopus. He will sleep with one eye open at all times to replicate full manning.
m. Key Assumptions: Current levels of operations are an aberration, will never be repeated, and should form no guide to current manning requirements, let alone future ones. Gerry Adams has embraced peace, there is no more requirement for crowd control in Northern Ireland, the FBU have forsworn strikes along with all other key public workers, Osama Bin Laden is about to hand himself in and the Easter Bunny will be providing Area Air Defence for London.
5. More detailed guidance can be found in JSP 4708- ?Magic Mushrooms, their consumption, effects and results in the MOD? and Minister Hoon?s Autobiography ?What Colour is the Sky in My World??
{CHOtS SIGNED}
I M Promoted
SO2 Spin
Ministry of Truth
Orwell Bldg
MOD 1984
Regards
BM
Tony D mentioned that all the Bolleaux was to weed out the imposters...a kind of management secret handshake.....but it appears that talking Bolleuax has replaced actual management and, the more bolleaux spoken - the less original thought of the originator.
I now work for an expanding Yorkshire company who have headhunted some high-flying players from big corporate firms......suffice to say, they get the urine extracted by the yorkshire folk everytime an idea is hoisted up that flagpole.
I'm considering putting a 'management speak' swear box in the aircraft - which should go someway to helping me celebrate Christmas!
I now work for an expanding Yorkshire company who have headhunted some high-flying players from big corporate firms......suffice to say, they get the urine extracted by the yorkshire folk everytime an idea is hoisted up that flagpole.
I'm considering putting a 'management speak' swear box in the aircraft - which should go someway to helping me celebrate Christmas!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Scotland
Posts: 664
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've just read How a Public Sector Agency Re-invigorated its Balanced Scorecard (PDF). I found it by googling for "Blue Sky", Methodology and Military.
When you read it, the first thing that screams out at you is Selection and Maintenance of the Aim, the first principle of war. A few pages of w@nkwords can be summed up as Co-operation, another principle of war.
The whole process can be summed up as Military Appreciation and all of the above should be understandable to any Sub Lt / 2Lt / APO walking out of the gates of Dartmouth, Sandhurst or Cranwell.
Surely:
Just because the objective is not taking / destroying / conquering something doesn't mean the organisational principles are necessarily any different?
Just because you move up to the strategic level from the tactical, doesn't mean you operate on different principles?
Just because you're called a Director of an Agency instead of a Commander doesn't mean you should have to learn a whole new w@nkword language rather than just apply sound military leadership principles?
Surely achieving a healthy Balance Sheet and Profit and Loss Account or financial failure is perfectly analogous to victory or defeat and the same leadership (or management if you must) principles can be applied?
I offer a deep-fried Mars Bar to anyone who can post something meaningful from the linked document that isn't covered by the principles of war, military appreciation and the orders and operational review process; i.e. standard military organisational leadership.
When you read it, the first thing that screams out at you is Selection and Maintenance of the Aim, the first principle of war. A few pages of w@nkwords can be summed up as Co-operation, another principle of war.
The whole process can be summed up as Military Appreciation and all of the above should be understandable to any Sub Lt / 2Lt / APO walking out of the gates of Dartmouth, Sandhurst or Cranwell.
Surely:
Just because the objective is not taking / destroying / conquering something doesn't mean the organisational principles are necessarily any different?
Just because you move up to the strategic level from the tactical, doesn't mean you operate on different principles?
Just because you're called a Director of an Agency instead of a Commander doesn't mean you should have to learn a whole new w@nkword language rather than just apply sound military leadership principles?
Surely achieving a healthy Balance Sheet and Profit and Loss Account or financial failure is perfectly analogous to victory or defeat and the same leadership (or management if you must) principles can be applied?
I offer a deep-fried Mars Bar to anyone who can post something meaningful from the linked document that isn't covered by the principles of war, military appreciation and the orders and operational review process; i.e. standard military organisational leadership.
TAC Int Bloke
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 975
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An Teallach,
In the words of the old post office add
'I saw this and thought of you'
More corporate bolleux for the collection
Doing a little light job hunting today I received an email from CwJobs looking for the following
I call 'Bull*hit managment'
In the words of the old post office add
'I saw this and thought of you'
More corporate bolleux for the collection
Doing a little light job hunting today I received an email from CwJobs looking for the following
A major Insurance Financial services company is looking to recruit a Six Sigma Black Belt candidate to work within a team that is currently involved in a variety of business critical workstreams, including training, technological change, business transition to e-claims handling and also playing a significant part in delivering the changes required as part of XCS 2005 Claims strategy. You will be responsible for identifying and engaging key stakeholders, identifying the most appropriate approach to tackle risks and issues and being advocate for the Six Sigma approach within the company.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Scotland
Posts: 664
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep, Maple
If you can tell me what "able to craft a visual driven from business need" from that job ad means, you're a better man than I, Gunga-Din! Job hunting in the age of the w@nkword makes six months as a flt cdr @ Basra International look attractive!
Excellent understanding of IT architectures & technologies, strong strategic planning skills, able to craft a visual driven from business need, technology capability and cost effectiveness. Good understanding of accounting & finance.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: England
Posts: 380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EESDL...
Like the idea of the "swear box" in the cab....
However, think you'll have a lean Christmas, as the box will surely remain empty......your PAX will be too busy thinking outside of it.
Regards
FS - Honorary "God's own" subject - in 24th probationary year !
Like the idea of the "swear box" in the cab....
However, think you'll have a lean Christmas, as the box will surely remain empty......your PAX will be too busy thinking outside of it.
Regards
FS - Honorary "God's own" subject - in 24th probationary year !
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 398
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So what are the odds on the military taking up this "Six Sigma" mularkey?
Within the next month 10/1
2-4 months 3/1
4-8 months 2/1
8-1 year evens
1-2 years 2/5
etc
U (will) Need To know ....(eventually)
Within the next month 10/1
2-4 months 3/1
4-8 months 2/1
8-1 year evens
1-2 years 2/5
etc
U (will) Need To know ....(eventually)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Lowlevel UK
Posts: 316
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Still seething from the amount the public purse has probably paid for the 2cm thick docket of paper in front of me. With the staggering selection of consultants walking the Capability corridors of MoD, it's time for this thread to get some fresh air if this is what might be on offer for at least one Mission Planning Aid:
Donald Rumsfeld clearly still has influence:
Rest assured that, on this occasion at least, it was sent back with its passage greased by constructive criticism like 'rambling', 'incoherent', 'even worse' and 'not fit for purpose'. But, what else is out there?
It is a reference work in the first instance, aiming toward the end deliverable of an End to End XXXXX scheduled for delivery by end of Q1 06 to enable and inform the Request for Change associated with the delivery of version 2.
The detail contained within the document is firmly based on what we know 'now' and what we expect 'in the future'.
Below the Glidepath - not correcting
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Britain
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Uh.....I think I've got a headache from this......or my brain's imploded
I did a LEAN VSA at Marham - even though no-one at work knew what VSA stood for. Turns out it means 'Value Stream Analysis', which in English means 'Look at how to effectively carry out a task, then describe that task by wasting hundreds of pounds worth of post-it notes stuck on the wall in a haphazard manner'.
I did a LEAN VSA at Marham - even though no-one at work knew what VSA stood for. Turns out it means 'Value Stream Analysis', which in English means 'Look at how to effectively carry out a task, then describe that task by wasting hundreds of pounds worth of post-it notes stuck on the wall in a haphazard manner'.
