The Creative Solution

Have you ever looked at a system, software design, or document and thought, “What the hell were they thinking?” If you said no then you are likely pretty new to software. If you’ve been around for more than one job you’ve likely seen things that will make you cringe. So the question is, if everyone realizes that the concepts are bad, how do they ever come into existence?

There are two reasons. The first is simple to explain: naivety. People that are new or simply “don’t get it” have a tendency to produce poor quality softare. This is the minor case because these people eventually learn the errors of their ways and learn to do it right. The other pimary cause is purely financial in nature.

When companies find themselves locked into a solution they no longer consider to be on par with their expectations they begin to find creative solutions to the problem. As an example, let’s look at the fictional companies of Western Paper Co. (WPC) and Eastern HR Corp (EHRC). WPC purchased the HR management software of EHRC a long, long time ago for way, way too much money. They were the only option at the time and they fit the needs of the organization. Over the years WPC has been approached by many other vendors that could handle the same things that EHRC could, for half the price. However, WPC found themseles entrenched in the applications and realized it was very expensive, time consuming, and difficult to move away from EHRC. So the fees continued.

A certain budget review was finally reached and WPC started tryng to figure out where the hell all of their budget was going. Oh, yeah: its EHRC. So they decide that they are going to limit the number of transactions that they are going to do with EHRC. The $500 data queries, the $5,000 onsite meetings, and the uber-expensive “training session” were all now suspect. Instead of paying $500 for each data query they began using macros to pull data from a human interaction (web, gui, etc.) application. Instead of upgrades to the software they started looking at “supplemental” products that would add to the main application without producing a lot of overhead but created much more system complexity. They began foregoing training and started to lack in best practices.

Why? Because the software they originally bought was too expensive. So how do they get out? Slowly.

Because the system is now entrenced within the core business it is no longer a simple matter of switching a software application. This is because the software now has business processes, departments, and budgets all built around it. These things, despite their intangible nature, are far more of a burden to migrate away from then the typical software application. This is why even bad companies (like EHRC) are able to maintain a profit with a bad product. At one time the bad product was “cutting edge” and sold. Then people got stuck.

In short, there is no silver bullet to get away from an inappropriate product. Only time will heal the wounds. However, the next time you see a questionable system, application, or document design think about the two ways that bad designs happen and ask if the solution was the best possible one given the situation. If not, condemnation is warranted. If so, then the entire organization should make it a top priority to move away from the sub-par solution in lieu of a better one.


But I'm Right!

I learned a lesson a long time ago and something that happened the other day made me think of it.

I have always been fortunate enough to be one of those people who can pick up a new skill and become proficient in it very quickly. Because of this skill I learned a lot about a whole lot of different things. I never considered myself an expert in but a couple things but felt that I knew a lot about a large array of subjects.

When things came up that I “knew” were wrong I would voice my opinion on how it needed to be done. This, in itself, wasn’t a problem. What was a problem was how I went about stating my opinions. I stated them as if they were fact and as if they were the only right way to do things. At times I was right – there was only one correct way. Many other times I just gave one of many possible solutions. Either way I felt, but never confirmed, that I had formed a reputation for being the office know-it-all. I don’t remember what it was but someone said something to me one day that caused me to rethink my attitude. So I decided to step back and analyze myself and figure out what I was doing wrong.

The conclusion I came to was simple for many people but was a virtual epiphany for me: my being right about something doesn’t negate the possibility of someone else being right in a totally different way.

I started trying to make it a point to handle my disagreements differently and have found that, over the years, it has made a world of difference in my personal and work relationships. Before, if I disagreed I would simply state why it wasn’t right and give the “correct” way. Now, even if I feel that the solution is totally wrong I try to ask questions. I still slip up – after all I’m human – but try to avoid resorting to old haunts.

Asking questions does two things at once: it helps me to understand the mindset of the person I am talking to and it helps to illustrate an alternate route. Many times I will find that the questioning leads to an understanding of the original design, solution, or idea that causes it to make much more sense to me. Other times it will solidify the idea that the concept is wrong.

At times I still find myself being a bit abrasive. However, I try to always think back to my hard learned lesson and approach things in a more diplomatic way. In fields like software, where there are countless solutions to any problem, not boxing your self – or others – into a single solution will generally prove to be a blessing.


Wax and Wane

Government spending and/or increased taxes are not bad in and of themselves. What matters in every situation where a politician proposes these things is not only what the change will do to the individual and the company but what it will do for the economy as a whole and whether expanding or contracting these things is the right move given the current state of the nation.

In general, you can have some situations where taxes are needed to fuel government spending and some where they are not. In times of deficit there are not enough funds to cover spending, so you have two options. You can either raise taxes or you can cut spending. Cutting spending is the obvious first choice but will only work to an extent before you start losing control of the basics that our government provides, such as police forces, legislative branches, etc. The only option that remains when cutting spending is not viable is to raise taxes. Conversely, if the nation is in a surplus then raising taxes and reducing government spending don’t really make a lot of sense.

Likewise, government spending can be both a blessing and a burden. In times of economic stagnation government spending, when applied judiciously, can help to stimulate growth within the economy. However, overspending by the government can have the counteractive effect of helping to ramp up inflation, which then has a trickle down effect on unemployment and the general welfare of the economy.

The point I am driving at here is simple: government spending and taxes are only bad in the situation that they are used inappropriately. If you hear that a given senator, mayor, or city official wants to raise taxes, don’t immediately shut them out. Listen to why they want to raise them then judge whether their reasoning is flawed or not. Many times this exercise will reveal that the individual isn’t making the choice that is in the best interest of the people. However, many other times this will prove to be the right choice. Some praise Reagan for operating the country very well in a deficit while others praise Clinton for doing the same with a surplus. The ultimate goal is a zero state where spending exactly equals taxes, however in the inevitable absence of this near mythical zero state, increases and decreases in both government spending and taxes will be warranted in certain situations.