management methodology name?
-
Years ago a popular mechanism for determining the various roles of different people in the company and their impact or relationship to the product being developed was defined using CARD. C = Concerned (Interested, but no direct impact) A = Accountable (Basically this person is fired if it fails) R = Responsible (People that do the work) D = ??? (Can't remember, but probably the people impacted by the product) Does anyone remember this and can give me a link to it's formal definition? Also, I believe another similar acronym took its place a few years back, but I can't recall its name either.
Tom Archer (blog) Program Manager - Windows SDK Headers, Libraries & Tools MICROSOFT
D = Deflector (Someone who deflects the responsibility and actual work onto others while taking credit for the final product)
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
-
When did responsibility and accountability become separated? No wonder this model died a death so deep it can't be found googling. What you looking it up for? Is this for a new Vista team management model? ;P Marc
Some people believe what the bible says. Literally. At least [with Wikipedia] you have the chance to correct the wiki -- Jörgen Sigvardsson
People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmerMarc Clifton wrote:
Is this for a new Vista team management model?
I notice that you are being bad to Tom lately:) -- modified at 14:38 Tuesday 1st August, 2006
-
When did responsibility and accountability become separated? No wonder this model died a death so deep it can't be found googling. What you looking it up for? Is this for a new Vista team management model? ;P Marc
Some people believe what the bible says. Literally. At least [with Wikipedia] you have the chance to correct the wiki -- Jörgen Sigvardsson
People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmerActually I disagree with that. Responsibility and accountability are veyr much different. For example, many people were responsible for the success of the Vista Dev Center - content strategy, site management, document, etc. However, there's only one person that "owns" it in terms of accountability - the ultimate decision maker - which was me. Therefore, it if failed, I would get fired.
Tom Archer (blog) Program Manager - Windows SDK Headers, Libraries & Tools MICROSOFT
-
Marc Clifton wrote:
Is this for a new Vista team management model?
I notice that you are being bad to Tom lately:) -- modified at 14:38 Tuesday 1st August, 2006
I don't take Marc too seriously. He just comes across a bit close-minded if someone has a different opinion than him - so in other words, he's more normal that he'd like to admit :)
Tom Archer (blog) Program Manager - Windows SDK Headers, Libraries & Tools MICROSOFT
-
Years ago a popular mechanism for determining the various roles of different people in the company and their impact or relationship to the product being developed was defined using CARD. C = Concerned (Interested, but no direct impact) A = Accountable (Basically this person is fired if it fails) R = Responsible (People that do the work) D = ??? (Can't remember, but probably the people impacted by the product) Does anyone remember this and can give me a link to it's formal definition? Also, I believe another similar acronym took its place a few years back, but I can't recall its name either.
Tom Archer (blog) Program Manager - Windows SDK Headers, Libraries & Tools MICROSOFT
-
Years ago a popular mechanism for determining the various roles of different people in the company and their impact or relationship to the product being developed was defined using CARD. C = Concerned (Interested, but no direct impact) A = Accountable (Basically this person is fired if it fails) R = Responsible (People that do the work) D = ??? (Can't remember, but probably the people impacted by the product) Does anyone remember this and can give me a link to it's formal definition? Also, I believe another similar acronym took its place a few years back, but I can't recall its name either.
Tom Archer (blog) Program Manager - Windows SDK Headers, Libraries & Tools MICROSOFT
-
D = Deflector (Someone who deflects the responsibility and actual work onto others while taking credit for the final product)
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
Chris Maunder wrote:
D = Deflector (Someone who deflects the responsibility and actual work onto others while taking credit for the final product)
:laugh: Have run across those types.
That's no moon, it's a space station. - Obi-wan Kenobi
-
I don't take Marc too seriously. He just comes across a bit close-minded if someone has a different opinion than him - so in other words, he's more normal that he'd like to admit :)
Tom Archer (blog) Program Manager - Windows SDK Headers, Libraries & Tools MICROSOFT
Tom Archer - MSFT wrote:
I don't take Marc too seriously. He just comes across a bit close-minded if someone has a different opinion than him - so in other words, he's more normal that he'd like to admit
Ouch! :laugh:
:josh: My WPF Blog[^]
-
Tom Archer - MSFT wrote:
I don't take Marc too seriously. He just comes across a bit close-minded if someone has a different opinion than him - so in other words, he's more normal that he'd like to admit
Ouch! :laugh:
:josh: My WPF Blog[^]
Josh Smith wrote:
Ouch!
And you wonder why I don't like him. Actually, I have some other reasons. Marc
Some people believe what the bible says. Literally. At least [with Wikipedia] you have the chance to correct the wiki -- Jörgen Sigvardsson
People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmer -
Marc Clifton wrote:
Is this for a new Vista team management model?
I notice that you are being bad to Tom lately:) -- modified at 14:38 Tuesday 1st August, 2006
Rama Krishna Vavilala wrote:
I notice that you are being bad to Tom lately
Well, he did get a lot of flack for that sig, which you will note, he did change. Marc
Some people believe what the bible says. Literally. At least [with Wikipedia] you have the chance to correct the wiki -- Jörgen Sigvardsson
People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmer -
Actually I disagree with that. Responsibility and accountability are veyr much different. For example, many people were responsible for the success of the Vista Dev Center - content strategy, site management, document, etc. However, there's only one person that "owns" it in terms of accountability - the ultimate decision maker - which was me. Therefore, it if failed, I would get fired.
Tom Archer (blog) Program Manager - Windows SDK Headers, Libraries & Tools MICROSOFT
Tom Archer - MSFT wrote:
Responsibility and accountability are veyr much different.
I choose to be close-minded on that view. ;P Marc
Some people believe what the bible says. Literally. At least [with Wikipedia] you have the chance to correct the wiki -- Jörgen Sigvardsson
People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmer -
D = Deflector (Someone who deflects the responsibility and actual work onto others while taking credit for the final product)
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
Chris Maunder wrote:
D = Deflector (Someone who deflects the responsibility and actual work onto others while taking credit for the final product)
a.k.a. delegator.
"Money talks. When my money starts to talk, I get a bill to shut it up." - Frank
"Judge not by the eye but by the heart." - Native American Proverb
-
Years ago a popular mechanism for determining the various roles of different people in the company and their impact or relationship to the product being developed was defined using CARD. C = Concerned (Interested, but no direct impact) A = Accountable (Basically this person is fired if it fails) R = Responsible (People that do the work) D = ??? (Can't remember, but probably the people impacted by the product) Does anyone remember this and can give me a link to it's formal definition? Also, I believe another similar acronym took its place a few years back, but I can't recall its name either.
Tom Archer (blog) Program Manager - Windows SDK Headers, Libraries & Tools MICROSOFT
C = Corporate R = Rhetoric U = Updated D = Daily ;P
'--8<------------------------ Ex Datis: Duncan Jones Merrion Computing Ltd
-
D = Deflector (Someone who deflects the responsibility and actual work onto others while taking credit for the final product)
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
:laugh: "Scotty, Deflectors up!" "Captain, I'm concerned that the person responsible for the dilithium crystals appears to be smoking them. I canna be held accountable for wha' happens if you keep them up too long..."
Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes www.PracticalStrategyConsulting.com
-
Josh Smith wrote:
Ouch!
And you wonder why I don't like him. Actually, I have some other reasons. Marc
Some people believe what the bible says. Literally. At least [with Wikipedia] you have the chance to correct the wiki -- Jörgen Sigvardsson
People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmerDude, you don't even know me - and are too closed-minded to even try so I'll return you to your life of alternating between bitching about those that judge you and judging others.
Tom Archer (blog) Program Manager - Windows SDK Headers, Libraries & Tools MICROSOFT
-
Is this what you are looking for, or is methodology too new ? http://www.enterprise-architecture.info/Images/Architecture%20Score%20Card/Architecture%20Score%20Card%20UK.htm[^]
Thanks Richard!
Tom Archer (blog) Program Manager - Windows SDK Headers, Libraries & Tools MICROSOFT
-
We use RACI R = Responsible A = Accountable C = Consulted (offers advice or opinions) I = Informed (kept in the loop) Might you D be some variation of our I?
Yeah, that's it :rolleyes: :) -- modified at 13:58 Thursday 3rd August, 2006
Tom Archer (blog) Program Manager - Windows SDK Headers, Libraries & Tools MICROSOFT
-
Rama Krishna Vavilala wrote:
I notice that you are being bad to Tom lately
Well, he did get a lot of flack for that sig, which you will note, he did change. Marc
Some people believe what the bible says. Literally. At least [with Wikipedia] you have the chance to correct the wiki -- Jörgen Sigvardsson
People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmerYep. I made a mistake, owned up to it as soon as someone drew my attention to it and fixed it immediately. I can definitely see where that makes me terrible :rolleyes:
Tom Archer (blog) Program Manager - Windows SDK Headers, Libraries & Tools MICROSOFT
-
Dude, you don't even know me - and are too closed-minded to even try so I'll return you to your life of alternating between bitching about those that judge you and judging others.
Tom Archer (blog) Program Manager - Windows SDK Headers, Libraries & Tools MICROSOFT
Tom Archer - MSFT wrote:
Dude, you don't even know me - and are too closed-minded to even try so I'll return you to your life of alternating between bitching about those that judge you and judging others.
:-D Marc
Some people believe what the bible says. Literally. At least [with Wikipedia] you have the chance to correct the wiki -- Jörgen Sigvardsson
People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmer