Explore Posterous

MURDER!! From the cotton splatter it appears to have been a pair of scissors and quite violent.

Loading mentions Retweet

Comment (0) »

Survival of the Fittest NFL Style (or Why Can't Every Team Play the Rams Each Week?)

For entertainment purposes only, I'll be updating my survivor picks here every Friday. The rules are simple. Pick a team to win each week. If they win, move on to the next week. Of course you can't pick the same team twice in the same regular season. None of this two-tier nonsense. One and done.

Note: there was also an anti-survivor competition. What's anti-survivor you ask? Well, you pick a team to LOSE each week and can only pick a team once. How awesome is that? What's not so awesome? When you pick the Bengals to lose at Green Bay in Week 2. And they don't lose. And you get eliminated after 2 weeks. Nothing more shameful than being eliminated in an anti-survivor competition having left Detroit and Tampa Bay on the table. For shame.

Here's my basic survivor strategy: rather than focus on what teams are good, focus on what teams are bad (and in some cases, really really bad). And here's the good news (good for us, not so much for Commissioner Goodell): as Bill Simmons has already mentioned on at least one occasion, there are plenty of them. Through the first six weeks, I've picked whoever is playing against any of the following teams: St. Louis, Cleveland, Tampa Bay, and Detroit. Oakland and KC are also on the list, though I haven't picked against them yet.  If those teams (let's call them the "Sucky Six") are not able to lose (due to bye weeks or if I've already picked their opponent), then I'll have to do some thinking and consider the matchups. As the season has unfolded, two other "automatic loss" teams have recently emerged: Washington and Tennessee.

Remember: don't worry about "saving" a team for later. You can't advance to the next week unless you survive this week. If there's a sure thing involving one of the elite teams over one of the Sucky Six (i.e., Indy over the Rams), take it. You don't want to be eliminated because you left Indy on the table in hopes of using them later in the season.

So, without further ado, here are my weekly survivor picks for the 2009 NFL season. Again, these are strictly for entertainment and informational purposes only.  All content is my opinion, and not of my employer, friends or family.

I'm also keeping track of the teams I've used in a separate post.

Week 1
New Orleans (over Detroit)

Week 2
Washington (over Rams)

Week 3
Baltimore (over Cleveland)

Week 4
San Francisco (over Rams)

Week 5
Philadelphia (over Tampa Bay)

Week 6
Pittsburgh (over Cleveland)

Week 7
Colts (over Rams)

Week 8
San Diego (over Raiders)

* I was tempted to take the Lions over the Rams, but obviously you can't rely on a team as bad as the Lions to win. Even over the Rams, a team even worse than the Lions.
* I also strongly considered taking Arizona at home against the Panthers once Carolina announced that Jake ("Picked Off") Delhomme was still starting at QB.
* But ultimately, I had to take San Diego at home over Oakland. The Raiders played the Chargers tough in the season opener, but that seems like a long time ago. And Oakland is one of the original Sucky Six (ironically making its first appearance as the designated loser in the survival pool).
* Fantasy note: not coincidentally, I picked up both the Cardinals and Chargers defenses to use this weekend. I expect big things.

Loading mentions Retweet

Comment (0) »

NFL Teams: Week by Week Survivor Picks

Arizona

Atlanta

Baltimore - Week 3

Buffalo

Carolina

Chicago

Cincinnati

Cleveland

Dallas

Denver

Detroit

Green Bay

Houston

Indianapolis - Week 7

Jacksonville

Kansas City

Miami

Minnesota

New England

New Orleans - Week 1

NY Giants

NY Jets

Oakland

Philadelphia - Week 5

Pittsburgh - Week 6

St. Louis

San Diego - Week 8

San Francisco - Week 4

Seattle

Tampa Bay

Tennessee

Washington - Week 2

Loading mentions Retweet

Comment (0) »

Creative Destruction and Enterprise Architecture

“The notion of creative destruction is found in the writings of Mikhail Bakunin, Friedrich Nietzsche and in Werner Sombart's Krieg und Kapitalismus (War and Capitalism) (1913, p. 207), where he wrote: "again out of destruction a new spirit of creativity arises". The economist Joseph Schumpeter popularized and used the term to describe the process of transformation that accompanies radical innovation. In Schumpeter's vision of capitalism, innovative entry by entrepreneurs was the force that sustained long-term economic growth, even as it destroyed the value of established companies that enjoyed some degree of monopoly power.” (Wikipedia)

From an enterprise architecture perspective, I find the concept of creative destruction an enlightening concept, in a number of ways:

1. Two steps backwards—enterprise architecture is not just a forward planning endeavor. Sometimes, to move forward on the roadmap, you actually may have to take a couple of step back. To build new processes or introduce new technologies, you may first have to scrap the old ones or at least stop investing in them. Just like with a physical blueprint, sometimes you can build unto an existing house or modify it, and other times, you need to bring in the wrecking ball (take a few steps back) and build fresh from the ground up. (Of course, at other times you may have to change the wings on the airplane while it’s still flying.) It is on a fresh palette that a painter can create a new masterpiece.
2. Creativity is the future—enterprise architects should not fear bringing in new ideas, innovation, and creative approaches. Just because something has been done a certain way in the past, does not mean that it always has to be done that way in the future. In fact, stagnation by definition means that the existing processes are doomed to be obsolete and surpassed by others who are adapting to an ever changing environment. Indeed, those enamored with the past can and often are a roadblock to doing things a new way. The old guard will stand up and say, we’ve been doing it this way or that way for so many years; who are you to come in here and try and change it; we know better; you don’t understand our environment. And sometimes, they may be right. But more often than not, the naysayers are fearful of and resistant to change. With ample research, planning, and testing we can develop better, faster, and cheaper ways of doing things.
3. Change can be radical—Much of EA change will be evolutionary, a planned sequence of steps in process improvement and technology enablement. However, some change will be more radical and revolutionary. Some organizational change requires selling off, closing down, merging, acquiring, or otherwise “destroying the value of established companies” in order to innovate and create something new and better. Like the process of evolution and the survival of the fittest, those companies and processes that are not “making the grade” need to be shut down, discontinued, or otherwise morphed into value-add forces of long-term economic growth.
   

One final thought. Destruction is a darn scary thing. No one wants to see their handiwork taken apart, brought down, and be forced to start again. In fact, it is hard enough in life to have to build something, but to see it destroyed and have to start again can be maddening. The mere fact of seeing something destroyed is destabilizing and demoralizing. The organization and person asks themselves: who’s to say the next build will be more stable, more everlasting, more productive? Who wants to feel that their time has been wasted on something that is now gone? Who can be so confident that their efforts will ever come again to a substantive and meaningful accomplishment, and one that compares or surpasses to what was? However, this is the clincher of creative destruction—while destruction is enormously painful and undermining to self-confidence, “out of destruction a new spirit of creativity arises.” With a fresh start, an organization or person can build anew and perhaps from the lessons of the past, from the pain of building and destruction, from the processes of working something through and evolving it, a better future can be created. And there is hope for a new enterprise or personal life architecture.

Loading mentions Retweet

Darwin and Enterprise Architecture

User-centric EA seeks the long term preservation, maturation, and growth of the organization and its ability to deliver mission execution.

Charles Darwin stated that "in the struggle for survival, the fittest win out at the expense of their rivals because they succeed in adapting themselves best to their environment.”

In the book Images of Organization by Gareth Morgan, Darwin’s theory of survival is extended from the individual to the enterprise. “Organizations, like organisms in nature, depend for survival on their ability to acquire an adequate supply of resources necessary to sustain existence. In this effort they have to face competition from other organizations, and since there is usually a scarcity of resources, only the fittest survive.”

Even in cases where resources are abundant and self renewing, organizations are always competing to survive. This competition takes the form of who can supply the end user with the products or services they need better, faster, and cheaper. The competition, in this case, is not for resources, but to be the resource to others. For in being the supplier of choice to its customers or stakeholders, the enterprise thrives and survives in executing its mission.

Indeed, in a competitive economy, there is always the opportunity for a competitor to arise and challenge the organization’s role in the marketplace. It is this competition that is considered not only healthy, but also a cornerstone for continuously improving product and service quality and keeping prices at bay for customers.

Even in government, where some may think there is no competition, agencies not only compete for limited resources (funds, people, and so on), but also for being the provider of choice to the citizens. As one example, in the federal government, there are several agencies that can provide banking regulation, such as the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), the Office of Thrift supervision (OTS), the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), and the Federal Reserve.

In a competitive environment, EA is a tool for business and technology planning and governance that helps an organization deliver on its mission and be the provider of choice to its customers.

Loading mentions Retweet