While I don't think an edictorial (i.e. ivory tower) approach is good either, businesses are definitely NOT democracies, nor should they be. Governance should be hands on (i.e. simply instituting formal reviews won't cut it), occurring on a day-to-day basis, and the best way to achieve compliance is to make it the path of least resistance. That being said, it's not always possible to make it the path of least resistance. All too often, there are developers who merely claim ignorance, or utilize stall tatics to the point where the act of compliance is so costly that it can't be done. I've encountered teams where they were told to do something long before coding ever began, but they merely chose to ignore it. This fact was exposed again at an operational readiness review, but at that point, coding had been completed and the cost of change was great.
-tb On Jun 26, 2007, at 1:38 AM, Hitoshi Ozawa wrote: > Todd Biske wrote: >> Until someone gets knocked (i.e. demoted, >> salary cut, fired, etc.) for not following explicit direction of the >> authorities, these activities will continue > That sounds like some martial rule. I thought we loved democracy. > I view SOA more in a spirit of using IT to help build a cross- > sectional > team which is more capable to > forming consensus. Remember, we're trying to obtain business > flexibility > - not just IT flexibility. > > Well, every business have their own culture and it's necessary to > adjust > SOA project to it. > > Cheers, > H.Ozawa > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
