From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,be9bf965710b207c X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-07-22 20:53:31 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: codesavvy@aol.com (codesavvy) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: An Assumption I Did Make (Was Re: official recommendations of Ada) Date: 22 Jul 2001 20:53:31 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Message-ID: <5be89e2f.0107221953.8a52@posting.google.com> References: <5be89e2f.0107200443.678562ea@posting.google.com> <3B590D83.A15CC947@mediaone.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.7.149.162 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 995860411 19411 127.0.0.1 (23 Jul 2001 03:53:31 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-support@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 23 Jul 2001 03:53:31 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:10440 Date: 2001-07-23T03:53:31+00:00 List-Id: One thing I didn't mention that seemed clear from my post but perhaps it wasn't is that I assumed that management colectively is competant. I was assuming that management could accurately predict the level of effort needed to complete projects and had meaningful productivity metrics in place. I also assumed that management was "risk averse" which I consider to be a good thing. So I am assuming that management will identify project risks and management them accordingly. When I say tha qualitative arguments will fall on deaf ears I wasn't putting down management. In fact I believe managers that would accept qualitative arguments that would lead to schedule uncertainty when it was not necessary would be acting irresponsibly. Ed Falis wrote in message news:<3B590D83.A15CC947@mediaone.net>... > codesavvy wrote: > > > From management's view point, using Ada instead of C/C++ is taking a > > major risk and when push comes to shove management probably will not > > take such a risk unless they can see the "payback" in using Ada. > > Since I've been "management", I have to say that "management" is not homogenous. Your generalizations are > just that. There's a lot more variety of approaches than your stereotypes (a la Dilbert) would lead one to > believe. You think there's no conflict of ideology and business strategy at that level? Often enough, taking > measured risk is _the_ way through, though it doesn't appear to be the modus from a developer's perspective. > > The point being, don't use assumptions about management motive to bolster your arguments. When you do, you're > attributing motivation and behavior unfairly. > > - Ed