Yes, this is a definite problem that I've seen too. And it's sad in 2008 that the problem exists.
One cause, in my experience, is people having to work for long periods in environments that do not provide good tools (i.e. simple programs that perform powerful, repetitive tasks well), while simultaneously being exposed to "super tools" that seem like they could do anything. A related cause is the historically high expense of some software, leading people to "maximize their investment" in one behemoth.
People become stubborn, and honestly believe that one or two "super tools" can eventually be contorted to achieve their goals (which may technically be true, but is an incredible waste of time). And, people stop looking for creative or more effective solutions, growing comfortable hacking away in software that was never meant to do half of what they want...such as the article's example of using a text editor to basically do revision control.
And these sentiments permeate throughout the organization. For instance, the "improvements" celebrated by managers, and E-mailed to entire groups, become stupid things like somebody discovering a new menu item or dialog option...not radical shifts in thinking, nor any real effort to establish better workflows.
1 comment
[ 3.8 ms ] story [ 10.1 ms ] threadOne cause, in my experience, is people having to work for long periods in environments that do not provide good tools (i.e. simple programs that perform powerful, repetitive tasks well), while simultaneously being exposed to "super tools" that seem like they could do anything. A related cause is the historically high expense of some software, leading people to "maximize their investment" in one behemoth.
People become stubborn, and honestly believe that one or two "super tools" can eventually be contorted to achieve their goals (which may technically be true, but is an incredible waste of time). And, people stop looking for creative or more effective solutions, growing comfortable hacking away in software that was never meant to do half of what they want...such as the article's example of using a text editor to basically do revision control.
And these sentiments permeate throughout the organization. For instance, the "improvements" celebrated by managers, and E-mailed to entire groups, become stupid things like somebody discovering a new menu item or dialog option...not radical shifts in thinking, nor any real effort to establish better workflows.