• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Evolution of Enterprise Software Development
 

Evolution of Enterprise Software Development

on

  • 1,343 views

This is a presentation that I gave at the SBTUG group in Sydney. It talks about the forces, consequences and strategies that organisations will need to be aware of an use if a SaaS work actually ...

This is a presentation that I gave at the SBTUG group in Sydney. It talks about the forces, consequences and strategies that organisations will need to be aware of an use if a SaaS work actually manifests itself.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,343
Views on SlideShare
1,340
Embed Views
3

Actions

Likes
5
Downloads
28
Comments
0

2 Embeds 3

http://www.slideshare.net 2
http://192.168.10.100 1

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Evolution of Enterprise Software Development Evolution of Enterprise Software Development Presentation Transcript

    •  
    • Mitch Denny Principal Consultant http://notgartner.wordpress.com [email_address]
    •  
    • yes, that Readify!
    •  
    • disclaimer choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead. choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though the opinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highly quantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981), Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concluded that many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect, unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney. 4 The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor of chapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 there were 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13 filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District of Washington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings. 5 Such differences persist over time, revealing the potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that will completely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet. What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.
    •  
    • sorry.
    •  
    • why?
    •  
    • change
    • change > opportunity
    • change > opportunity > profit!
    •  
    • forces
    • forces consequences
    • forces consequences strategies
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    • Aa architect classification scheme
    • forces fundamental, but subtle changes over time
    • mobility (and by extension, connectivity)
    • mobility (and by extension, connectivity)
    • work life balance €  ‚ ƒ
    • work life balance €  ‚ ƒ
    • work life blending €  ‚ ƒ
    • question: is Facebook a personal or work tool?
    • ‚ ƒ
    • ‚ ƒ
    • new users = new expectations ‚ ƒ
    • video: little britain
    • if the computer says no, I’ll find another computer that says yes. ‚ ƒ
    • other forces
    • (empowered users) computing power ‚ ƒ
    •  
    •  
    •  
    • the thing about forces . . .
    • consequences knock on effects from forces
    •  
    • computer scientist
    • computer scientist
    • computer scientist computer user
    • computer scientist computer user
    • computer scientist computer user vendor
    • computer scientist computer user vendor
    • system administrator computer user vendor software developer
    • system administrator computer user vendor software developer
    • what next?
    • tip: who works for who?
    • computer scientist
    • computer scientist computer user
    • computer scientist computer user vendor
    • system administrator computer user vendor software developer
    • system administrator computer user vendor software developer
    • question: what about my special requirements?
    • system administrator computer user vendor software developer
    • video: yahoo pipes
    • see also: Microsoft Popfly Google App Engine? Apple Automator
    • implications
    • firewall
    • firewall value on the inside value on the outside
    • firewall value on the inside value on the outside Exchange, CRM, SharePoint . . . Yahoo! Pipes, Facebook, SalesForce . . .
    • firewall value on the inside value on the outside Exchange, CRM , SharePoint . . . Yahoo! Pipes, Facebook, SalesForce . . .
    • firewall value on the inside value on the outside Exchange, CRM , SharePoint . . . Yahoo! Pipes, Facebook, SalesForce . . .
    • firewall value on the inside value on the outside
    • firewall value on the inside value on the outside
    • firewall value on the inside value on the outside
    • firewall value on the inside value on the outside
    • firewall value on the inside value on the outside
    •  
    • consider: Microsoft Online (Exchange/CRM)* Windows Live Mesh Oracle on EC2 Saasu* GoGrid SaaSGrid
    • question: what does my techology stack look like?
    •  
    • major data centers (provides network, power, cooling, redundancy)
    • major data centers (provides network, power, cooling, redundancy) platform vendors (provide operting systems, virtualisation)
    • major data centers (provides network, power, cooling, redundancy) platform vendors (provide operting systems, virtualisation) framework vendors (provide identity, database, general APIs)
    • major data centers (provides network, power, cooling, redundancy) platform vendors (provide operting systems, virtualisation) framework vendors (provide identity, database, general APIs) applications (provide user functionality)
    • major data centers (provides network, power, cooling, redundancy) platform vendors (provide operting systems, virtualisation) framework vendors (provide identity, database, general APIs) applications (provide user functionality)
    • major data centers (provides network, power, cooling, redundancy) platform vendors (provide operting systems, virtualisation) framework vendors (provide identity, database, general APIs) tier #1 applications (provide user functionality) tier #2 applications (provide user functionality and mashups)
    •  
    • strategies conscious decisions made to cope with or take advantage of change
    • get out before you’re homeless . . .
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    • Windows Live ID & CardSpace, Yahoo!, Google, Open ID + millions more?
    • question: what about Active Directory?
    • tip: let users control identity
    • User Table: UserID ... Identity Table: UserID IdentityTypeID IdentityReference UserRight Table: UserID RightID UserRightReference
    • Identity Table: UserID IdentityTypeID IdentityReference
    • tip: grant and revoke is key
    •  
    • tip: expect a platform
    • demo: EC2 provisioning
    • question: great, but what about my users?
    • business model?
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    • discussion points
    • limit your liability
    • rich vs. reach
    • the role of developers ?
    • the role of sysadmins ?
    • do I run a data center ?
    • CIO vs. CTO
    • Thank-you! Mitch Denny Principal Consultant, Readify http://notgartner.wordpress.com [email_address]