Saturday, 6 December 2003

Bad info or no info

There was a thread on slashdot the other day (can't find it now) where one of the people commented about whether it is better to have a stopped watch or a slow watch: bad info or no info. This reminded me of something that the 4100 prof talked about with making sure that your process is "in control".

If your watch is inaccurate + - something, than you at least have an idea of how you are doing. Otherwise you are just guessing. Or if it is consistantly slow, you can compensate for that. Otherwise you are just guessing. I guess that it just depends on how much + - your measurements are off.

What happens if you don't have any info? Does that just mean that you work really hard out of fear? Like if the school never told us our grades, would be work harder because we didn't have a clue, compared to getting back 90's all the time and stopping trying? (well, I stop trying, others do not). This is something that I will have to ponder some more.
Listening to: Madonna & Mirwais - Paradise (Angel & Fabian Mix)


2 comments:

  1. of course, the problem with a watch running slow is that you may not realize that it is running slow.
    At least if its stopped then you know something is wrong. You can basically apply the same logic to business metrics (did I just say that?).
    I think it would be better to know that something just plain isn't working as opposed to it partially working, but having no idea what's wrong with it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I guess that was the 4100 prof's logic... I guess my assumption was that you knew that it was incorrect, but roughly how much. (or you could track it against something to figure out the diff.)

    ReplyDelete