Why one is different than the others even when their design is typically similar?
The answer, there are uniqueness in these people, and they are not working directly for one another, anyway.
Even in a single organization, there is truthfulness to this.
Literature, books--though not many definitive subject directed for value that can be made by technology--and standards, and business conduct or policy, would ease even a little but relentless initiative to change the whole picture, both big and small.
It can translate innovation in a more serious tone, especially when stakeholders, the obvious and the passive, can get a thrust from it.
In enterprise technology, such thing can be significant.
Somewhat an understanding to technology equity at present, might be helpful.
The need to distinguish internal practices, not just what can work which barely scratched the required system from status quo, what's appropriately possible for a system in its most optimized setting, the most acceptable within an industry and, going beyond a little bit, if it's compliant to global standards and regulations--which most organizations are expected to do nowadays.
Everyone understands it, even one can create something that is par for the course and without doubt self-serving, not the ability to practically make it work, a distinction that makes organization and its stakeholders only perform better with progressive trajectory.
Comments