On Tue, Nov 06, 2001 at 10:02:21AM -0800, Chris Warner wrote:
> I am refering to peoples resistance to change. "If it ain't broke don't fix
> it" attitude. I see it all the time in my line of work. People get so used
> to a certain methodology or process, that they fail to see the potential to
> optimize the process.
What about the "Even if it's broke, please don't make it more broken"
attitude?" Unfortunately, this attitude seems to be far too rare.
In this case, you're proposing the purchase of some expensive hardware
(two laptops, an LCD display, a printer, a wireless LAN, and a new
timing system) in order to increase the number of failure mechanisms,
increase the expertise needed, and it's not clear that you're really
reducing the total amount of work required.
You can't just ask people to commit to an as yet unimplemented system
with pie-in-the-sky claims and expect them not to be skeptical. We're
not Menlo Park venture capitalists, and we're not DARPA.
There needs to be at the very least a proof of concept, if not a full
demonstration showing that the system really is idiot-proof, robust,
and truly saves effort. If you can make that demonstration and
minimize the cost of hardware, you can probably sell the system to
other local clubs, if not to the SCCA for National events.
I get the impression that SFR is not the best place to be a beta (or
alpha) test site, simply because the events are so tightly run that
there's not much room for screwups. And running two systems in
parallel, requires twice as much work. I've worked in the trailer,
and people in there are too busy to be given additional tasks.
--
john@idsfa.net John Stimson
http://www.idsfa.net/~john/ HMC Physics '94
|