From Project VRM
Revision as of 09:37, 12 September 2008 by <bdi>Iain.Henderson</bdi> (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Let's start a discussion.

Joe.andrieu 17:02, 9 September 2008 (EDT)

FROM: Iain Henderson

Here's my original query from email a couple of weeks back. I'd be delighted to think we can retain the core simplicity, but think so far as the r-button outside of point applications is concerned we'll need to take a sizable step back to gain perspective before writing a detailed functional spec then technical one.

My own view, certainly as far as the wider deployment of Relbutton, is that there is a lot of work to do on the functional spec before we get to the technical spec.

I believe it can be made to work if we put enough thought time into it, but in current guise I think it's simplicity (a core virtue) is such that at the organisational end I think it would just bounce off, because it just moves the underlying/ actual complexity elsewhere or ignores it (and they already have ways of dealing with the complexity).

The complexity, as I see it, is that there are many facets of customer-supplier relationships, all of which could be leveraged in visualisation/ automation:

- reason for first use - longevity - depth - breadth - status (live, dormant, potential etc) - nature (pay as a you go, account) - importance (to both parties)

....and many more

If we can find a way of addressing the underlying complexity in ways that mask it then we'd be onto something very powerful.