Peer pressure enlists loyalty in ways that bureaucracy doesn’t.
John Mackey, CEO and co-founder, Whole Foods
This quote is true in so many different levels, but still quite ignored by the standard way of management.
The normal company, instead of making a good use of peer pressure, label it as a bad thing, and believe in the passive-aggressive affirmation of its values and rules as the way to better manage employees.
What they don’t see is that the only way to really generate a company with the wanted values is to hire people who believe in them and empower them as much possible, making “good” peer pressure be the driving power fo your business.
It’s hard to accept that the employees define the values of the company, and not the other way around.
good blog….. people who believe in them and empower them as much possible, making “good” peer pressure be the driving power fo your business.
Mark,The paper shows a ptaretn which we in the SOAP space have been using for a long time to avoid the limitations and brittleness associated with WebMethod and its kin. The fact that the authors used messages to explicitly decouple business and integration domains is a good thing, even for POX-based solutions.The hyperbole in the paper about being POST-REST made me “de-prest” because I believe it muddies rather than clarifies an already confusing situation.If you can pare this hyperbole and rampant meme-isms from the paper, then you see the ptaretn is not so different from those we’d use in Indigo (or indeed in certain WS transactions code :-)). Even the notion of using code + XStream metadata as a kind of contract is mirrored in WCF.So to the crux of the issue: I believe the authors did their work an injustice by coupling it to an ill-understood and completely pointless SOA versus REST-like argument. But the ptaretn, even if obfuscated, is sensible.Jim