Re: [OT] WWI and change of doctrine

On Tue, May 28, 2002 at 10:46:52PM +0200, K.H.Ranitzsch wrote:
> From: <laserlight@quixnet.net>
> > "Each year, roll 1 die.  On a 1-4, your doctrine remains the same,
no
> matter how bad the results are or how obviously wrong it is to you,
the
> wargamer who has 50+ years worth of hindsight.  On a 5-6, you are
permitted
> to change the doctrine to better suit reality.  DRM -1 if your
generals are
> appointed on the basis of political connections or inherited office. 
DRM -1
> if you have already changed doctrine within the last 10 years."
> >
> > It is very easy to have the attitude "This worked last time..."
> 
> Well, it DID work last time, and you are never sure that the new ideas
will
> work, in spite of all the theory, training and testing. And you get
worried
> when your (or your subordinates) life depend on it.
> In a lot of e-mail discussions discussing present-day military
innovations
> (e.g.for the US the OICW, wheeled AFV, black berets) you get an awful
lot of
> comments along the line "That's fine in theory or the training ground,
but
> it won't work in the field". Is that much different ?

I find myself having these sorts of conversations at work.

You say to people "What about trying <methodology> ?"

"Ohhhh, that'll never work. My god, we'd have projects fail!"

"We have projects fail at the moment.."

Something like 1/3 of all IT projects are cancelled with no noticeable
outputs. The remaining projects arrive /on average/ 200% over budget
and 200% late.

So I periodically suggest the current methods don't work and we should
maybe look at other things, and everytime people reply "we've always
done it that way..."

I mention this to my partner. He points out that there is considerable
political defensibility from failing 100% of the time but having toed
the party line. No-one wants to try XP or anything else because if
that fails, its their fault - it's a decision that can be traced back
to them. If they do the same thing as everyone else and they fail,
they can plead that they are at worst guilty only of a lack of