🚀 go-pugleaf

Subj:  corporate heirarchies                 90-07-01 22:21:34 EDT
From:  ShepT

I actually fully agree that ultimately someone needs to be allowed to make
decisions, even decisions that affect others. I am fully aware that, if given
the chance, many groups will chatter on endlessly about needless details - and
not decide efficiently because of it. (I have been the president of a software
company for several years, and I have made many decisions affecting everybody.)

Nonetheless, in order for the captain to make decisions he/she needs to have
input from the crew.  And this communication should be facilitated, not
stunted, by groupware.  A well run ship is one where the crew is free, and
encouraged, to provide info from their areas of expertise - leaving the captain
to put all the pieces together into his/her ultimate decsion.

Kent, your argument about being endlessly "nattered" by everyone would seem to
also be arguing against simple email. (Or the telephone, for that matter.)
Software should allow and support many forms of communication, going in all
sorts of directions.  It should be up to the organization involved to set
appropriate standards against unnecessary chatter, it should absolutely not be
dictated by the software itself.

* The preceeding is reply is cross-posted from the Groupware SIG on
* America Online. To reply to an individual on America Online, contact:
*
* Christopher Allen - Consensus Development
* P.O. Box 2836, Union City, CA 94587-7836
* AT&T:            (415) 487-9206
* America Online:  AFL MacDev
* AppleLink, GEnie, MacNET, MCI:  Consensus   
* Internet:        cdp!consensus@labrea.stanford.edu
* UUCP:            uunet!pyramid!cdp!consensus