Evolution of Enterprise Software Development

1,871 views

Published on

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.

0 Comments
5 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,871
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
10
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
31
Comments
0
Likes
5
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Evolution of Enterprise Software Development

  1. 2. Mitch Denny Principal Consultant http://notgartner.wordpress.com [email_address]
  2. 4. yes, that Readify!
  3. 6. 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.
  4. 8. sorry.
  5. 10. why?
  6. 12. change
  7. 13. change > opportunity
  8. 14. change > opportunity > profit!
  9. 16. forces
  10. 17. forces consequences
  11. 18. forces consequences strategies
  12. 23. Aa architect classification scheme
  13. 24. forces fundamental, but subtle changes over time
  14. 25. mobility (and by extension, connectivity)
  15. 26. mobility (and by extension, connectivity)
  16. 27. work life balance €  ‚ ƒ
  17. 28. work life balance €  ‚ ƒ
  18. 29. work life blending €  ‚ ƒ
  19. 30. question: is Facebook a personal or work tool?
  20. 31. ‚ ƒ
  21. 32. ‚ ƒ
  22. 33. new users = new expectations ‚ ƒ
  23. 34. video: little britain
  24. 35. if the computer says no, I’ll find another computer that says yes. ‚ ƒ
  25. 36. other forces
  26. 37. (empowered users) computing power ‚ ƒ
  27. 41. the thing about forces . . .
  28. 42. consequences knock on effects from forces
  29. 44. computer scientist
  30. 45. computer scientist
  31. 46. computer scientist computer user
  32. 47. computer scientist computer user
  33. 48. computer scientist computer user vendor
  34. 49. computer scientist computer user vendor
  35. 50. system administrator computer user vendor software developer
  36. 51. system administrator computer user vendor software developer
  37. 52. what next?
  38. 53. tip: who works for who?
  39. 54. computer scientist
  40. 55. computer scientist computer user
  41. 56. computer scientist computer user vendor
  42. 57. system administrator computer user vendor software developer
  43. 58. system administrator computer user vendor software developer
  44. 59. question: what about my special requirements?
  45. 60. system administrator computer user vendor software developer
  46. 61. video: yahoo pipes
  47. 62. see also: Microsoft Popfly Google App Engine? Apple Automator
  48. 63. implications
  49. 64. firewall
  50. 65. firewall value on the inside value on the outside
  51. 66. firewall value on the inside value on the outside Exchange, CRM, SharePoint . . . Yahoo! Pipes, Facebook, SalesForce . . .
  52. 67. firewall value on the inside value on the outside Exchange, CRM , SharePoint . . . Yahoo! Pipes, Facebook, SalesForce . . .
  53. 68. firewall value on the inside value on the outside Exchange, CRM , SharePoint . . . Yahoo! Pipes, Facebook, SalesForce . . .
  54. 69. firewall value on the inside value on the outside
  55. 70. firewall value on the inside value on the outside
  56. 71. firewall value on the inside value on the outside
  57. 72. firewall value on the inside value on the outside
  58. 73. firewall value on the inside value on the outside
  59. 75. consider: Microsoft Online (Exchange/CRM)* Windows Live Mesh Oracle on EC2 Saasu* GoGrid SaaSGrid
  60. 76. question: what does my techology stack look like?
  61. 78. major data centers (provides network, power, cooling, redundancy)
  62. 79. major data centers (provides network, power, cooling, redundancy) platform vendors (provide operting systems, virtualisation)
  63. 80. major data centers (provides network, power, cooling, redundancy) platform vendors (provide operting systems, virtualisation) framework vendors (provide identity, database, general APIs)
  64. 81. 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)
  65. 82. 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)
  66. 83. 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)
  67. 85. strategies conscious decisions made to cope with or take advantage of change
  68. 86. get out before you’re homeless . . .
  69. 91. Windows Live ID & CardSpace, Yahoo!, Google, Open ID + millions more?
  70. 92. question: what about Active Directory?
  71. 93. tip: let users control identity
  72. 94. User Table: UserID ... Identity Table: UserID IdentityTypeID IdentityReference UserRight Table: UserID RightID UserRightReference
  73. 95. Identity Table: UserID IdentityTypeID IdentityReference
  74. 96. tip: grant and revoke is key
  75. 98. tip: expect a platform
  76. 99. demo: EC2 provisioning
  77. 100. question: great, but what about my users?
  78. 101. business model?
  79. 106. discussion points
  80. 107. limit your liability
  81. 108. rich vs. reach
  82. 109. the role of developers ?
  83. 110. the role of sysadmins ?
  84. 111. do I run a data center ?
  85. 112. CIO vs. CTO
  86. 113. Thank-you! Mitch Denny Principal Consultant, Readify http://notgartner.wordpress.com [email_address]

×