New York Times Readers Opinions
The New York Times
Home
Job Market
Real Estate
Automobiles
News
International
National
Politics
Business
Technology
Science
Health
Sports
New York Region
Education
Weather
Obituaries
NYT Front Page
Corrections
Opinion
Editorials/Op-Ed
Readers' Opinions


Features
Arts
Books
Movies
Travel
Dining & Wine
Home & Garden
Fashion & Style
New York Today
Crossword/Games
Cartoons
Magazine
Week in Review
Multimedia
College
Learning Network
Services
Archive
Classifieds
Personals
Theater Tickets
Premium Products
NYT Store
NYT Mobile
E-Cards & More
About NYTDigital
Jobs at NYTDigital
Online Media Kit
Our Advertisers
Member_Center
Your Profile
E-Mail Preferences
News Tracker
Premium Account
Site Help
Privacy Policy
Newspaper
Home Delivery
Customer Service
Electronic Edition
Media Kit
Community Affairs
Text Version
TipsGo to Advanced Search
Search Options divide
go to Member Center Log Out
  

 [F] New York Times on the Web Forums  / Science  /

    Missile Defense

Technology has always found its greatest consumer in a nation's war and defense efforts. Since the last attempts at a "Star Wars" defense system, has technology changed considerably enough to make the latest Missile Defense initiatives more successful? Can such an application of science be successful? Is a militarized space inevitable, necessary or impossible?

Read Debates, a new Web-only feature culled from Readers' Opinions, published every Thursday.


Earliest Messages Previous Messages Recent Messages Outline (4031 previous messages)

lchic - 06:03am Aug 31, 2002 EST (# 4032 of 4045)

Innovation (1)

The seven steps for 'lightening strategies for innovation' / Zangwill

STEP

1. Make innovation the strategy

    innovation improves efficiency $cost$down$ to the extent that strategy is reshaped
2. Establish foundations
    Develop foundation competencies - knowledge & technology; create new corporate culture, planning, institute best practices (benchmarking)
3. Eradicate fumbles
    To half product development time and cost lesson fumbles of 'rework, changes, delays, bottlenecks , admin delays, approval waits'
4. Place customer first
    Produce products people 'want'
5. Develop a business strategy
    Innovation should make 'big picture' & 'total business picture' sense
6. Design the product - concurentEngineering
    involves co-operative inhouse communication re marketing/engineering/manufacturing with parallel processing
7. Improve continuously
    systematic analysis enables

lchic - 06:05am Aug 31, 2002 EST (# 4033 of 4045)

Looking more closely at step four:

wrt MD if the 'customer/client' were interpreted as the receiver of the product ... then what market research has been conducted to determine if the folks who 'get' eg 'the cluster bombs' are getting them to the exact design and intensity required ?!

lchic - 06:07am Aug 31, 2002 EST (# 4034 of 4045)

Looking more closely at step four:

wrt MD if the 'customer/client' were interpreted as the receiver of the product ... then what market research has been conducted to determine if the folks who 'get' eg 'the cluster bombs' are getting them to the exact design and intensity required ?!

Would step seven;

continuous improvement be then analysed simply as

No Thanks!


lchic - 06:14am Aug 31, 2002 EST (# 4035 of 4045)

Looking at the seven steps wrt an innovately improved approach to reading --- (Teens and Prisoners - not having grasped by conventional disorganised method) then:

1. Innovation is the high frequency word approach.

2. Delivered by those trained to methodology.

3. Streamline approach re materials, delivery method and target clients.

4. Build the program to meet the 'unmet needs' of the client.

5. Develop re 'big picture delivery' with matching business strategy in place.

6. Design pre-reading product

7. Subject it to feedback for continuous improvement

Note the Deming influences throughout the above.

lchic - 06:20am Aug 31, 2002 EST (# 4036 of 4045)

Raising the right question at the right time is the skill of the creative facilitator - Kao

kalter.rauch - 06:27am Aug 31, 2002 EST (# 4037 of 4045)
Earth vs <^> <^> <^>

......or the clever obstructionist...isn't that right, lchic?!?!?

lchic - 06:28am Aug 31, 2002 EST (# 4038 of 4045)

Obstructionists raise the wrong question at the wrong time!

lchic - 06:31am Aug 31, 2002 EST (# 4039 of 4045)

p.s. No such thing as a 'clever obstructionist' ... isn't that right moniker-Muddle?!

More Messages Recent Messages (6 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

 [F] New York Times on the Web Forums  / Science  / Missile Defense





Home | Back to Readers' Opinions Back to Top


Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company | Privacy Policy | Contact Us