*** A quick note/ad: As I’ve been working with the first cohort of startups doing my System Evaluation program, I’ve realized that a big goal for many of them is to create more consistent conventions/standards across teams. So I’ve reframed the description to emphasize this, and also renamed it as a
I read somewhere (or was told) that in an organization it's better to be closer to profit centers (think sales) than to cost center (think IT). Being in the latter, it was not a fun thought.
This, it seems, is VERY much about the same---looking at data as a cost (infrastructure, people associated with it, all the risks) versus looking at it as the source of revenue (which I'd say it is ultimately).
$2/min. That was in 1988. That's what everyone's time is worth. However, don't expect to be paid for it. It's a metric, that's all. Consider a meeting with twelve people, lasting an hour and half. $2,160. Back in '88, $2 would cover cover coffee, donut, and tip. Today. it's $5, without the tip. When I meet two local friends we figure it's still $2 per, and we're paying $10 rent.
Work time is precious. I do a quick calculus as to whether a call, text, or email will be faster; do we need a trail, etc. Is there a subtext that warrants a f2f?
Jesse points to "unforced errors". Perhaps, I repeapeat repeat myself.
"fundamentally inadequate" , "lousy", "noisy". are words that apply to restaurants as easily as to data. Well run eateries understand scheduling, and making payroll. The value of time is not uniform. Football has different rules for the final two minutes; basketball is driven by the buzzer. Financial markets inversely value derivatives as expiration dates approach. Rideshares have surge pricing, and recently fast food has been testing the waters.
IN the lab, time is not laminar. It can be inordinately viscous. Good luck to all.
I read somewhere (or was told) that in an organization it's better to be closer to profit centers (think sales) than to cost center (think IT). Being in the latter, it was not a fun thought.
This, it seems, is VERY much about the same---looking at data as a cost (infrastructure, people associated with it, all the risks) versus looking at it as the source of revenue (which I'd say it is ultimately).
$2/min. That was in 1988. That's what everyone's time is worth. However, don't expect to be paid for it. It's a metric, that's all. Consider a meeting with twelve people, lasting an hour and half. $2,160. Back in '88, $2 would cover cover coffee, donut, and tip. Today. it's $5, without the tip. When I meet two local friends we figure it's still $2 per, and we're paying $10 rent.
Work time is precious. I do a quick calculus as to whether a call, text, or email will be faster; do we need a trail, etc. Is there a subtext that warrants a f2f?
Jesse points to "unforced errors". Perhaps, I repeapeat repeat myself.
"fundamentally inadequate" , "lousy", "noisy". are words that apply to restaurants as easily as to data. Well run eateries understand scheduling, and making payroll. The value of time is not uniform. Football has different rules for the final two minutes; basketball is driven by the buzzer. Financial markets inversely value derivatives as expiration dates approach. Rideshares have surge pricing, and recently fast food has been testing the waters.
IN the lab, time is not laminar. It can be inordinately viscous. Good luck to all.