RE: Structure vs Substance?

Subject: RE: Structure vs Substance?
From: "Giordano, Connie" <Connie -dot- Giordano -at- FMR -dot- COM>
To: "'Dan Emory'" <danemory -at- primenet -dot- com>, TECHWR-L <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 14:49:29 -0400

You've missed the point entirely. Neither Plato, Michele Davis, me or
anyone else are anti-process, in fact we understand and utilize standards,
procedures and guidelines to do our jobs. I myself have said so in at least
three messages on this thread, and Andrew has said it at least once. We are
saying the process in itself is not a goal, and putting process above
content (or should I say obsessing over process) is not merely useless, it's
counter-productive. Creativity is a completely different issue entirely.

Politely asking you to please blow your smoke in another direction

Connie Giordano
-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Emory [mailto:danemory -at- primenet -dot- com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 1:54 PM
Subject: Re: Structure vs Substance?

At 01:28 PM 6/13/00 -0400, SteveFJong -at- aol -dot- com wrote:

>But can process
>help? I think so, if the whole organization buys in to them.
Your statement reminded me of something I already knew, but failed to
dredge up as the ultimate response to those like Plato who think
structure, process, and standards are often counterproductive.

I doubt if any of those anti-process folks would grant that same freedom
restrictive processes to other departments of the company in which they
particularly the engineering groups upon which they rely for the information
they require. So, as I suggested in the post which started this thread,
anti-process folks want to be able to blow smoke up their own ass (as well
as everyone else's) without a reciprocal smoke-blowing entitlement granted
to the other departments. They think they're entitled to some kind of
indulgence that liberates them from the restrictive processes imposed on
because "writing is so much more creative than anything else done in my

The chef in the cafeteria probably feels the same way. But suppose the chef
also decides to transcend policies and processes so as to unfetter his
juices. If the result is that the food is not ready at the appointed
time, it will be the anti-process folks who'll scream the loudest,
demanding that
the chef must submit to discipline and process, and his creative urges will
to suffer if it means they don't get to eat on time.
| Nullius in Verba |
Dan Emory, Dan Emory & Associates
FrameMaker/FrameMaker+SGML Document Design & Database Publishing
Voice/Fax: 949-722-8971 E-Mail: danemory -at- primenet -dot- com
10044 Adams Ave. #208, Huntington Beach, CA 92646
---Subscribe to the "Free Framers" list by sending a message to
majordomo -at- omsys -dot- com with "subscribe framers" (no quotes) in the body.

Previous by Author: RE: Structure vs. Substance?
Next by Author: B2B vs B2C software doc planning (Was: Too much structure)
Previous by Thread: Re: Structure vs Substance?
Next by Thread: Re: Structure vs Substance?

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads

Sponsored Ads