This is a good introduciton to REST. REST is an architectural style, although it was not intended to be one when the thesis was published. Each URL is a representation of the resource, and the client changes state as it navigates from one representation to another. Some style details:
1. Client-Server, pull based model. Stateless. caching possibility. etc.
2. Nouns used for URLs.
3. HTTP get used when representations are only accessed- the underlying resource is not modified.
4. The user should be encouraged to navigate from resource to resource.
amit's blog: 11/01/2003 - 11/30/2003
can not believe that I am blogging a blog. But then I have seen this elsewhere.
This relates to the idea of Market Research firms being considered factories which process information and churn out finished goods- insight, understanding, and usable knowledge. Comparing with the old model:
Factory MR firm
Raw material Information (0s and 1s)
Machinery Models, Frameworks, Methodologies
Finished Good Insight, Understanding, Structured knowledge, action items
Skilled Labor Experienced Consultants, MR experts
Unsilled Labor Backoffice people, report writers, generalists
This insight is applicable in general to the whole knowledge industry, in a sense. There are two observations here:
1. One must try to get into a position in the knowledge industry where one is specialised- the equivalent of a skiller labor.
2. One must develop machines for the knowledge industry. Machines are things which automate the processing of inputs, easing the work of humans and allowing economy of scales. While they may take time to develop in the beginning, their rewards are rich and long lasting. The machines in the knowledge industry are themselves intangible in nature. They are the frameworks, methodologies and models using which information can be processed and some kind of useful output generated.
TCS: Tech Central Station - Is Intelligent Design a Bad Scientific Theory or a Non-Scientific Theory?
Phew! Before making the entry, let me say that I have done something stupid in installing this google toolbar thing. Struggled for 15 minutes before getting the browser to work right.
Anyway- this interesting article talks about how Intelligent Design is not really science, because it does not meet the criterion of falsifiability. This is, of course, right. The author draws upon Karl Popper's views.
What do I have to say about this? Since I also think that something like I.D. could be a reality, what is my view? Hmm. I actually think that I.D. can put up a clear case of falsifiability. It would have to go back to the kind of things Paul Davies talks about in his "The Origins of Life". Higher level laws, and how certain things which exist in nature are simply not possible without intelligent design.
data warehousing
http://www-1.ibm.com/grid/pdf/GW510-5041-00F.pdf
Data Warehousing- I thought it'll be useful to find an analogy for the ETL process. ETL stands for Extract (take data from various potentially heterogeneous sources), Transform (modify the structure of the data so that it meets the integrity requirements of the DW system) and Load (load the data in the DW as records). To understand this whole process better, think of John- a book retailer. John's business depends to a large extent on people's ability to find the right books in his shop. To smoothen this process, John has to do 3 basic functions.
First, he has to procure the books from various sources- different publishers with their own invoicing, billing and delivery mechanisms, and perhaps libraries for used books. This is the Extract function.
Second, he has to catalog the books in his shop, so that he has a proper information structure in his bookshop, and he knows where to find what. This is the Transform function.
Third, he has to put the books and arrange them systematically so that they are not lying around in a mess, and people can search or browse for them. This is the Load function.
BW Online | June 16, 2004 | Personality Profiling: Shrink to Fit?
BW Online | June 16, 2004 | Personality Profiling: Shrink to Fit?
The above is a discussion about the effectiveness of psychological testing of current and potential employees in an organization. It brings out a very interesting notion- how are the 3 concepts of personality, behavior and performance related.
That your personality drives your behavior is well accepted, although the correlation is not trivial to establish even in this. For example, a certain type of behavior is difficult to ascribe to a certain personality trait in a general sense- often behavior is also affected a great deal by one's context. For example, the clean and prim campus of Infosys technologies in Bangalore discourages people from throwing garbage on the roads- the same people who might not think twice before dirtying an already dirty road in the interiors of the city.
What is more interesting from a management perspective is the issue performance. Even if there are certain behavioral traits in a person, it still does not imply that one's performance will be affected in a predictable manner on that basis alone. The context factor plays a role here as well. One's environment- peers, the boss, the perception of the company, one's growth prospects- all these play a role in determining the performance of an individual as much as, or more than, one's behavior.
So that is what a professional manager should seek to do- have a system in place which gets optimal levels of performance from different kinds of individuals, with different personalities and different behavioral traits. This system virtualizes the individual as far as performance is concerned. This does not mean it hides the individual eccentricities and idiosyncrasies, forcing the organization culture onto his persona. It rather is a mechanism using which the person is given a context in which he can perform best. Performance does not need to kill your individuality.
Microsoft Management Roadmap Leads to System Center
Microsoft Management Roadmap Leads to System Center
This link talks about Microsoft's Systems Center- a products constituting the Systems Management Server and Microsoft Operations Manager. Here are a few techie cow-words (after the term bullword used by Mckinsey to indicate euphemistic management jargon):
Blackcomb- next release of windows server 2003
Application Center Server- Microsoft’s server farm management and monitoring product (this will be discontinued after System Center comes out)
Yukon- the search and storage engine used in next release of MS Sql Server.
Rosetta- Reporting Engine
Push-button your way through this e-home - The Economic Times
Push-button your way through this e-home - The Economic Times
The above story in Economic Times describes a new trend in India- smart homes. Amit Gandhi is a environment consultant who has purchased a new house, and got it fitted with the latest gizmo-giri that he could find around. Vitrag Bafna, the MD of Zeos Infotech, the company providing this solution, has already fitted 10 homes with techno-wizardry.
This includes finger-print recognition, voice control, mobile activated devices, alerts through e-mail and mobile and so on...
Its nice. The applicability of smart systems is one that I have long believed in, and it is nice to see the belief finding justification in a developing country like India.
Magazine questions Gartner Group objectivity
Magazine questions Gartner Group objectivity
The above article highlights the potential conflict of interest that market research firms might be facing in today's complicated corporate environment. MR firms generate value by mining for knowledge inside information, by developing insights from data, by collating and churning reams of statistics and presenting them in a usable manner. The product that they deliver is a completely intangible one- knowledge and insight. In fact this product is the epitome of money-making in the knowledge industry. They are a virtualized factory which takes as input the 0s and 1s of the IT industry, string them together using their own experience (the equivalent of labour skills), their theoretical models, frameworks and methodologies (the equivalent of engines and machinery), and come out with a finished product that helps other people in the IT industry make informed decisions. This is how a MR firm works- it is a virtual factory processing information and knowledge.
Because of this inherent nature of their business, they are highly susceptible to misinterpret the data, to misread the statistics, to draw the wrong conclusions from market information. The question we have to ask is- are they accountable? Are we measuring the end result that they are giving us? Are we setting standards for them that we can judge their performance against?
Half a decade ago, manufacturing underwent a revolution. From the loosely designed, sometimes arbitirary processes, from the person-oriented and subjective measures of performance emerged the idea that would redefine the whole industry worldwide- that would lead to no less than a transformation in the way work was done. The revolution can be summed up in one word - Quality.
Are we measuring the Quality of knowledge and insights that MR firms are generating? Evidence suggests we are not. Perhaps it is time to evolve a Quality Model for MR firms, wherein clients can judge whether they are getting what they are paying for.
