<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Pt 2: The #1 answer to the rhetorical survey question about implementation barriers: culture</title>
	<atom:link href="http://janetclarey.com/2008/05/15/pt-2-the-1-answer-to-the-rhetorical-survey-question-about-implementation-barriers-culture/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://janetclarey.com/2008/05/15/pt-2-the-1-answer-to-the-rhetorical-survey-question-about-implementation-barriers-culture/</link>
	<description>Spinning the Social Web</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Jan 2012 02:24:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave Ferguson</title>
		<link>http://janetclarey.com/2008/05/15/pt-2-the-1-answer-to-the-rhetorical-survey-question-about-implementation-barriers-culture/comment-page-1/#comment-3115</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave Ferguson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 08:56:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://janetclarey.com/?p=641#comment-3115</guid>
		<description>These are great points, Janet.

In terms of both turf wars and fear of change, it helps me to look at how things got the way they currently are.  Not &quot;how did this problem happen?&quot; but &quot;what things were they trying to fix?&quot;

For example, tedious, paper-laden procedures guarded by some administrative watchdog probably emerged as piecemeal solutions to individual situations, some of them truly problems.  (Some were probably nonsense, but probably not all.)

Knowing what the problems were in the past helps you figure out if they still are problems and, if so, to see how well your solution addresses their cause.

Easier said than done, of course.  But it can help convince the other party that you can recognize things that matter to him.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>These are great points, Janet.</p>
<p>In terms of both turf wars and fear of change, it helps me to look at how things got the way they currently are.  Not &#8220;how did this problem happen?&#8221; but &#8220;what things were they trying to fix?&#8221;</p>
<p>For example, tedious, paper-laden procedures guarded by some administrative watchdog probably emerged as piecemeal solutions to individual situations, some of them truly problems.  (Some were probably nonsense, but probably not all.)</p>
<p>Knowing what the problems were in the past helps you figure out if they still are problems and, if so, to see how well your solution addresses their cause.</p>
<p>Easier said than done, of course.  But it can help convince the other party that you can recognize things that matter to him.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave Ferguson</title>
		<link>http://janetclarey.com/2008/05/15/pt-2-the-1-answer-to-the-rhetorical-survey-question-about-implementation-barriers-culture/comment-page-1/#comment-5300</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave Ferguson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 08:56:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://janetclarey.com/?p=641#comment-5300</guid>
		<description>These are great points, Janet.

In terms of both turf wars and fear of change, it helps me to look at how things got the way they currently are.  Not &quot;how did this problem happen?&quot; but &quot;what things were they trying to fix?&quot;

For example, tedious, paper-laden procedures guarded by some administrative watchdog probably emerged as piecemeal solutions to individual situations, some of them truly problems.  (Some were probably nonsense, but probably not all.)

Knowing what the problems were in the past helps you figure out if they still are problems and, if so, to see how well your solution addresses their cause.

Easier said than done, of course.  But it can help convince the other party that you can recognize things that matter to him.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>These are great points, Janet.</p>
<p>In terms of both turf wars and fear of change, it helps me to look at how things got the way they currently are.  Not &#8220;how did this problem happen?&#8221; but &#8220;what things were they trying to fix?&#8221;</p>
<p>For example, tedious, paper-laden procedures guarded by some administrative watchdog probably emerged as piecemeal solutions to individual situations, some of them truly problems.  (Some were probably nonsense, but probably not all.)</p>
<p>Knowing what the problems were in the past helps you figure out if they still are problems and, if so, to see how well your solution addresses their cause.</p>
<p>Easier said than done, of course.  But it can help convince the other party that you can recognize things that matter to him.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

