REPLY SD Impact on National Government Policies (SD6129)

[Jack Ring jring amug.org]

Posted by  "Jack Ring" <jring at amug.org>
As usual, Jack Homer has clarified the situation considerably.  I wonder, though, 
about "... all we can do is keep working hard and looking for the best opportunities..."  
What if WE included SDS, the INCOSE, www.incose.org, the SDPS, www.sdpsnet.org, and 
ISSS, www.isss.org,  then perhaps a greater effect could be generated.  Could four 
"professional societies" really act to the benefit of their constituents?

On the other hand, we must be clear about the objective function that the system 
called Congress is pursuing.  Too often scientists and others presume the objective 
function is somewhere near Liberty and Justice for All or even Peace.  To the degree 
that our models and analyses get in the way of the pork barrel path to perpetual 
re-election such scientists are simply 'a horde of gnats' to be ignored and escaped.

Several years ago John N. Warfield designed the Interactive Management process with 
which variegated stakeholders could be brought to a condition of consensus about at 
least some aspects of their problematic situation.www.jnwarfield.com  In one 
application Henry Alberts examined the DoD procurement process and gained resounding 
concurrence from Project Managers that several flaws in the process could and must be 
fixed.  When the proposal got to Capitol Hill and Congressional staffers saw that it 
could interfere with pork barrel prerogatives it died a quick and silent demise.

Several months ago Sen. McCain lamented that a great number of bad buys had exploited 
holes in the McCain-Feingold bill.  I wrote to inquire why so many holes had be 
installed in the bill in the first place and whether he would appreciate a systems 
review of future bills.  No answer.

cheers,
Jack Ring 
Posted by  "Jack Ring" <jring at amug.org>
posting date  Tue, 2 Jan 2007 21:12:19 -0700