This topic has been archived. It cannot be replied.
-
枫下家园 / 人到中年 / （REBOOTED）如果在INCOMPLETE的INPUT和INCOMPLETE的KNOWLEDGE的情况下，问题必须要回答 - 你是选择等COMPLETE的时候回答还是在INCOMPLETE的基础上回答。如果是后者，RISKS和UNCERTAINTIES怎么预防？（我下午和晚上有活动，抱歉不能看贴了。）
-c__wang(c);
2012-1-21
(#7227872@0)
-
取决于对答案正确可能性和解决问题的时效性的判断。对风险的预防，可以是基于对风险的probability和impact的判断上的action plan。
-majorhomedepot(马甲后的炮);
2012-1-21
(#7227882@0)
-
What about human dynamics?
-c__wang(c);
2012-1-21
(#7227922@0)
-
You can factor it into your model, but not necessary.
-majorhomedepot(马甲后的炮);
2012-1-21
(#7227923@0)
-
What does failure mean to you? Objectively and subjectively?
-c__wang(c);
2012-1-21
(#7227925@0)
-
Depending on context, meaning of failure varies. It can be: failed to get best result, failed to avoid the worst, failed to make profit, failed to beat average, failed to stick to plan, failed to plan, etc.
-majorhomedepot(马甲后的炮);
2012-1-21
(#7227932@0)
-
No, these are "unable"
-c__wang(c);
2012-1-21
(#7227936@0)
-
Not quite follow your point. Failure is an outcome or result, and can be objective or subjective or both. Being unable is purely subjective. Here is an example: You invest 1M in some properties and get 10% return.It can be a failure, depending on context, if real estate average return is 50%. It is judged after the fact and not really related to "unable".
-majorhomedepot(马甲后的炮);
2012-1-21
{146}
(#7227950@0)
-
In your example, I would call it "un-satisfaction". I met a smart lady. She says there is no such a thing called failure. If sth did not work, then process, elements, structure, etc. need to be taken apart and to find the discrepancies. Still digesting
-c__wang(c);
2012-1-21
(#7228770@0)
-
That's why I said it all depends on context. 10% return can be considered as success in many cases. Since success or failure is judged after the process, you have to define the benchmark criteria upfront (before the process).Ideally, the definition of benchmark is though subjective, e.g. you may pick S&P or real estate index as benchmark depending on your preference, but the judgement of success or failure can be very objective where you can measure the outcome against your predefined criteria quantitatively.
The mistake of the "smart" lady is the fact that she defines the criteria after the processes, then no objective criteria can be applied.
-majorhomedepot(马甲后的炮);
2012-1-21
{432}
(#7228823@0)
-
哥，我今天饭你。还有13分钟。
-c__wang(c);
2012-1-21
(#7228840@0)
-
你说的BENCHMARK是个BASELINE还是个SET? "SMART"LADY的目的是把既成的打碎，分析ELEMENTS和LINKAGES。假设FAILURE是DELAY的话，反推一下。可能最终DELAY是合宜的。这是为纠将来错。
-c__wang(c);
2012-1-22
(#7228894@0)
-
1) You can't prove completeness. 2) No matter how you do, you have to take some risk. The major point is that you must know how much risk you will take (of cause, it is assessed based on incomplete knowledge).
-bigjoe(月黑风高之system疯狂);
2012-1-21
(#7227946@0)
-
Uncertainty is difficult to handle. It may be categorized as Known Uncertainty and Unknown Uncertainty. The first can be handled by the predefined control measure, but for the unknown uncertainty, I don't know. Maybe extra buffer needed.
-bigjoe(月黑风高之system疯狂);
2012-1-21
(#7227949@0)
-
Extra buffer for unknown uncertainty is a waste. Unknown uncertainty means the risk to be assumed but not managed. If that makes you uncomfortable, you have to do more risk analysis to turn some unknown to known.
-majorhomedepot(马甲后的炮);
2012-1-21
(#7227955@0)
-
very difficult topic. Happy new year.
-bigjoe(月黑风高之system疯狂);
2012-1-21
(#7227965@0)
-
Happy New Year 2!
-majorhomedepot(马甲后的炮);
2012-1-21
(#7227975@0)
-
I would think you always want to transfer the risks and uncertainties to somebody else? at least as the 1st try?
-c__wang(c);
2012-1-21
(#7228773@0)
-
I should ve said "comfortable" than complete
-c__wang(c);
2012-1-21
(#7227977@0)