Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
I always thought consultants were paid obscene amounts of money to waste
employees time asking them how to solve a problem, ignore their wisdom, write a report based on the solution they had decided on beforehand and depart before the whatsit hit the thingy! MaxB Yes, that sounds familiar. It's no coincidence that consultancy begins with con ;-) |
#22
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 13:28:41 +0100, "dB" wrote:
I always thought consultants were paid obscene amounts of money to waste employees time asking them how to solve a problem, ignore their wisdom, write a report based on the solution they had decided on beforehand and depart before the whatsit hit the thingy! MaxB Yes, that sounds familiar. It's no coincidence that consultancy begins with con ;-) Consult: A cross between "con" and "insult". (With thanks to Scott Adams). |
#23
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 25 Jul, 21:43, Chris wrote:
Of course they can - incorrect data downloaded to cards can easily makethem inoperable. I've not yet come across r/w memory that can't be reset if theres dodgy data on it so unless they're upgrading any software there may be on it I can't see how it could happen. And if thats the case you have to ask yourself why. Both today anda couple of weeks ago are being put down to Transys.& no hacking fix.# Yes , because I'm sure TfL would release a statement saying "transys have been attempting a workaround for the MiFARE hack but have so far failed miserably". B2003 |
#24
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jul 26, 2:22*pm, James Farrar wrote:
On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 13:28:41 +0100, "dB" wrote: I always thought consultants were paid obscene amounts of money to waste employees time asking them how to solve a problem, ignore their wisdom, write a report based on the solution they had decided on beforehand and depart before the whatsit hit the thingy! MaxB Yes, that sounds familiar. It's no coincidence that consultancy begins with con ;-) Consult: A cross between "con" and "insult". (With thanks to Scott Adams). It's not incompatible with my version if the management decision is to hire consultants to override the wisdom of the staff and to produce the solution that management hired them to produce (possibly on the grounds that it's the solution that the particular consultancy always produces). |
#25
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In message
, at 12:25:39 on Sat, 26 Jul 2008, MIG remarked: It's not incompatible with my version if the management decision is to hire consultants to override the wisdom of the staff and to produce the solution that management hired them to produce (possibly on the grounds that it's the solution that the particular consultancy always produces). The other common scenario is that the consultants produce the solution that the staff recommend, but the management weren't listening to the staff. So everyone wins! Call it a catalyst. -- Roland Perry |
#26
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() The other common scenario is that the consultants produce the solution that the staff recommend, but the management weren't listening to the staff. So everyone wins! Call it a catalyst. Except it cost the company a lot of money for someone to state the obvious. |
#27
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In message , at
20:52:55 on Sat, 26 Jul 2008, dB remarked: The other common scenario is that the consultants produce the solution that the staff recommend, but the management weren't listening to the staff. So everyone wins! Call it a catalyst. Except it cost the company a lot of money for someone to state the obvious. But without paying the money the "obvious" goes un-stated. You probably wouldn't be surprised to learn how many managements are convinced that no good ideas will ever come from the staff, so those ideas end up being laundered through a consultant. The consultant doesn't have zero work to do, of course; he has to listen to all the staff, then select the ideas that makes sense. But the chances are that many times there will be some non-trivial subset of the staff who will recognise it as "their" idea. -- Roland Perry |
#28
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Roland Perry wrote:
You probably wouldn't be surprised to learn how many managements are convinced that no good ideas will ever come from the staff, so those ideas end up being laundered through a consultant. I have to say I (as a staff member with ideas) only realised the usefulness of this relatively recently. The consultant, having been brought in to have ideas but without any idea of how the place runs, is going to reach for anyone willing to explain things to him like a drowning man for a lifebelt. If you can get a couple of hours alone with him you have a good chance of getting your ideas in front of people with far less effort than it would normally take through conventional bureaucracy. This does require that you aren't expecting to be thanked or recognised for you contribution, and that you have sufficient self control that when management order you to drop everything and run with the exciting new idea the consultant has proposed you don't go 'hey, that was what I've been saying for years'. Sadly it's a common human bias to value something that cost a lot of money more. Tom |
#29
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In message , at 10:11:45 on Sun, 27
Jul 2008, Tom Barry remarked: You probably wouldn't be surprised to learn how many managements are convinced that no good ideas will ever come from the staff, so those ideas end up being laundered through a consultant. I have to say I (as a staff member with ideas) only realised the usefulness of this relatively recently. The consultant, having been brought in to have ideas but without any idea of how the place runs, is going to reach for anyone willing to explain things to him like a drowning man for a lifebelt. If you can get a couple of hours alone with him you have a good chance of getting your ideas in front of people with far less effort than it would normally take through conventional bureaucracy. This does require that you aren't expecting to be thanked or recognised for you contribution, and that you have sufficient self control that when management order you to drop everything and run with the exciting new idea the consultant has proposed you don't go 'hey, that was what I've been saying for years'. Sadly it's a common human bias to value something that cost a lot of money more. Most of that's true, but I think you are being a little hard on the "drowning man" - their job is to come into a new place and find out how it ticks. As for use of consultants in general, here's another way of thinking about them: A computer software company needs a new head office and rather than design it themselves (and unwilling to hire as employees the people with the skills) decide to subcontract it out to some building design consultants. Or as they are often called, architects. These folk interview the management and staff to get an idea of the requirements (probably none of them are programmers so want to understand what the special needs are). Eventually they draw up plans in a sufficiently professional way that they are accepted by management and the board. The management were sceptical about some aspects (particularly some of the more staff-friendly ones), but the architects were able to argue that these features had worked well in other buildings they had done and figures that showed increased productivity; the board were impressed by the financial due diligence from people with credentials, and appreciated someone to pass the planning approval buck to. The staff recognised many of the things they had asked for, and wondered why specialists were needed at all; if only the management had listened to them! -- Roland Perry |
#30
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jul 27, 11:01*am, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 10:11:45 on Sun, 27 Jul 2008, Tom Barry remarked: *You probably wouldn't be surprised to learn how many managements are convinced that no good ideas will ever come from the staff, so those ideas end up being laundered through a consultant. I have to say I (as a staff member with ideas) only realised the usefulness of this relatively recently. *The consultant, having been brought in to have ideas but without any idea of how the place runs, is going to reach for anyone willing to explain things to him like a drowning man for a lifebelt. *If you can get a couple of hours alone with him you have a good chance of getting your ideas in front of people with far less effort than it would normally take through conventional bureaucracy. This does require that you aren't expecting to be thanked or recognised for you contribution, and that you have sufficient self control that when management order you to drop everything and run with the exciting new idea the consultant has proposed you don't go 'hey, that was what I've been saying for years'. Sadly it's a common human bias to value something that cost a lot of money more. Most of that's true, but I think you are being a little hard on the "drowning man" - their job is to come into a new place and find out how it ticks. As for use of consultants in general, here's another way of thinking about them: *A computer software company needs a new head office and rather than design it themselves (and unwilling to hire as employees the people with the skills) decide to subcontract it out to some building design consultants. Or as they are often called, architects. These folk interview the management and staff to get an idea of the requirements (probably none of them are programmers so want to understand what the special needs are). Eventually they draw up plans in a sufficiently professional way that they are accepted by management and the board. The management were sceptical about some aspects (particularly some of the more staff-friendly ones), but the architects were able to argue that these features had worked well in other buildings they had done and figures that showed increased productivity; the board were impressed by the financial due diligence from people with credentials, and appreciated someone to pass the planning approval buck to. The staff recognised many of the things they had asked for, and wondered why specialists were needed at all; if only the management had listened to them! My experience is that the management want to cover their backs WHEN something fails, by saying "but we paid the most expensive consultants". They could have spent an awful lot less on working with their own staff to prevent it failing in the first place. I've seen that a few times. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
How can you have a signal failure on an ATO system? | London Transport | |||
Tube/Bus system and Oyster card | London Transport | |||
Oyster communication failure | London Transport | |||
Oyster communication failure | London Transport | |||
Oyster Cards on buses - 50% failure rate? | London Transport |