In Trump's defense, he is getting a lot "done" and is staying on point with his campaign rhetoric
but this is a shoot first aim later kind of guy, it seems to me . . . and one shooting from the hip with no comprehensive plan and certainly no meaningful analytics from which to draw
in a highly complex network of inter-linking parts (a much different set of business variables than he is used to dealing with), it is prudent to examine how changes in one area
potentially impact other ancillary systems; there is no way this could have been done
in his short-time in office, even if he had "boots on the ground" strategists working all Summer long
most probable rationale is some outsourced "think tank" group of "experts" implementing the plans, yet with so many changes coming fast and furious, such as they are, the potential for disruption is high
. . . VERY high
and the architectural analysis of what goes where incomplete . . . meaning, if something breaks, it will be more complex (and infinitely more costly) to discover what's broken
and also much more complicated to implement necessary safe guards to mitigate the risk that the "fix" may break something else
it's kind of a "you break it you buy it" whirlwind crap shoot . . . only who gets the final bill, if they break something ??
take a wild guess
*********
none of this could have happened if there weren't already fairly detailed position papers outlining what should be done and how to do it
it is REALLY unlikely that this could be happening without a fairly sizable group of gov't and business leaders on board with what he's doing
and the day to day implementation has to be outsourced to some administrative body, likely private contractors
however, these "plans" are being created and designed in "silos" and the interlinking parts are nearly impossible to chart out in such a tight window
so one thing has a plan, another thing has a plan, but the analysis is in comparison to "current state"
yet the totality of changes being implemented means there is no "current state" with which to measure success
by the time they start one program, the baseline upon which they did their analytics is already way different
especially with such sweeping changes taking place, all at the same time !!
ALL of this is happening in a REALLY short-window of time . . . also this is being released into the world without "the planners" having adequate access to existing systems in order to create mitigation plans if something might "go wrong"
in English -- they are likely flying somewhat blind
hoping the good outweighs "the bad"
and taking the rewards and leaving the inevitable "clean up" to others
but this is a shoot first aim later kind of guy, it seems to me . . . and one shooting from the hip with no comprehensive plan and certainly no meaningful analytics from which to draw
in a highly complex network of inter-linking parts (a much different set of business variables than he is used to dealing with), it is prudent to examine how changes in one area
potentially impact other ancillary systems; there is no way this could have been done
in his short-time in office, even if he had "boots on the ground" strategists working all Summer long
most probable rationale is some outsourced "think tank" group of "experts" implementing the plans, yet with so many changes coming fast and furious, such as they are, the potential for disruption is high
. . . VERY high
and the architectural analysis of what goes where incomplete . . . meaning, if something breaks, it will be more complex (and infinitely more costly) to discover what's broken
and also much more complicated to implement necessary safe guards to mitigate the risk that the "fix" may break something else
it's kind of a "you break it you buy it" whirlwind crap shoot . . . only who gets the final bill, if they break something ??
take a wild guess
*********
none of this could have happened if there weren't already fairly detailed position papers outlining what should be done and how to do it
it is REALLY unlikely that this could be happening without a fairly sizable group of gov't and business leaders on board with what he's doing
and the day to day implementation has to be outsourced to some administrative body, likely private contractors
however, these "plans" are being created and designed in "silos" and the interlinking parts are nearly impossible to chart out in such a tight window
so one thing has a plan, another thing has a plan, but the analysis is in comparison to "current state"
yet the totality of changes being implemented means there is no "current state" with which to measure success
by the time they start one program, the baseline upon which they did their analytics is already way different
especially with such sweeping changes taking place, all at the same time !!
ALL of this is happening in a REALLY short-window of time . . . also this is being released into the world without "the planners" having adequate access to existing systems in order to create mitigation plans if something might "go wrong"
in English -- they are likely flying somewhat blind
hoping the good outweighs "the bad"
and taking the rewards and leaving the inevitable "clean up" to others
RSS Feed