Dedicated HDMI port
4,204 karma · joined March 28, 2013
Edit: My (forgotten) comment when this was posted 10 months ago [2]: "So pleased to see this. Had fun playing with the language but at the time learning OTP seemed a big ask"
[1] https://vekatze.github.io/neut/terms.html#necessity-and-noem...
A few people might do that informally, sure, even as part of something bigger, but there’s no escaping the needs to 1) coordinate over shared resources and 2) organise around shared commitments. And where do those commitments come from? Implies some kind of strategising, and if that’s not a collective thing, then you’re relying on someone doing the telling. And of the options that are strategised, what’s acceptable and what’s outside our purpose, identity, etc?
There are theoretical limits on what formal organisational systems can achieve in terms of information flow (so managers shouldn’t over-depend on them), but nevertheless, the above activities are fundamental. Take any of them away and you no longer have a viable system, one capable of ensuring it’s ability to maintain itself, to act independently, and to increase possibility in a changing and perhaps hostile environment.
Disclosure: I have a book coming out on this stuff shortly, bringing some decades-old, well-tested, and well-regarded theory up to date. FWIW I also wrote one of the leading books on Kanban (2014), not that this changes any of the above, apart from that Kanban is among other things an effective coordination system (though incomplete in the above terms, but then so are all the others).
As I write, its links to ghc.gitlab.haskell.org are all broken.
Alternatively: OKRs can be an effective way to summarise a strategy conversation that has actually happened. Outside of that, caution is advised.
What leading indicators would suggest that you’re making real progress towards that goal? Those would be key results, more granular than that objective. And how might you bring them about? That they inspire solution ideas is the point really.