y2k Impact on Economy-Oct 25th Senate hearinggreenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread
I Have not seen this posted ,if it has I appologize now. I see more and more hearings leaning towards major problems.I found this interesting reading.The just in time method is constantly mentioned,The Meta group listed speaker seems a little concerned about how The US uses the weekend storm senario. http://www.senate.gov/~y2k/hearings/991025/index.htm sorry Im not a linker.....................
-- sara (firstname.lastname@example.org), November 02, 1999
De Nada, sara
make no mistake, we will feel the impact economically.
Hearing: Y2Ks Impact on the Economy
-- spider (email@example.com), November 02, 1999.
Here is a snip
United States Senate Special Committee
on the Year 2000 Technology Problem
Statement of Leonard Neely
October 25, 1999
Leonard Neely - Y2K's Impact on the Economy - October 25, 1999 - Senate Y2K
Successful JIT requires a stable environment, quick identification and resolution of problems and bottlenecks, strong vendor/supplier relations, and timely response to changes in supply and demand. In other words, JIT leaves no room for surplus or safety stock, supply shortages, equipment malfunctions, or other delays along the production line. Typical JIT management policies are serial in nature and dont anticipate the flexibility required in successfully managing these complexities. Based on these requirements, it is only logical that manufacturers fear the millennium transition and what it may pose for their production lines and inventory systems. With complex supply chain analysis uncovering significant differences in quality levels of remediation, contingency planning will be the overriding success differentiator for most corporations, and may make the difference for the survival of their position in the marketplace.
Given the levels of Y2K procrastination, many organizations conducted contingency planning with less rigor, and at a lower priority than the earlier inventory, correction, and testing phases of their Y2K projects. This usually was a result of slippage in these earlier project milestones without available relief for phases that also compete for the same resources or in the worst case, the organization is only paying lip service to the activity to maintain the appearance of due diligence to stakeholders. Most organizations spent more time in correction and testing than they anticipated. I believe many organizations have underestimated the complications that may be caused by confusion and stress that could occur during a Y2K crisis management incident. This is due in part to the number of events that may have to be dealt with in some organizations and the postmortem nature of discovery, whereby many failures are not discovered downstream until after supplier data is corrupted and embedded in the decisions of consumer JIT systems. In addition, there are the complicating factors of multiple, simultaneous, synchronistic, cascading, and geographically dispersed failures.
Due to time constraints, many businesses have not conducted crisis management testing that actually executes contingency plans beyond tabletop simulation or have not tested plans at all. How many people in this chamber would consider making a formal speech without first rehearsing or conducting a walkthrough? Now, imagine everyone in here trying to make a speech all at once without any rehearsal. Not only are you a speaker, you are also a member of the audience, so you must listen as well. Meanwhile somebody who is also speaking just raised an issue you question. Do you interrupt your speech for your own question? Obviously, you would frequently have a situation where multiple speakers had the floor. But even with only you speaking, wouldnt you at least practice or rehearse? Practice, practice, practice many organizations could learn from this sage advice heard from coaches and teachers in our youth. Not following this advice just doesnt make good business sense. Yet, META Group research, from our client base of more than 1,900 companies, indicates many firms are not preparing for this unique event with even a dress rehearsal, let alone comprehensive tested contingency plans.
-- Brian (firstname.lastname@example.org), November 03, 1999.
This snip is from the same hearing and mentions the conserns expressed by Sara above.
I believe this is somewhat shortsighted. Most organizations, and people in general, are under the false perception that Y2K problems are limited to the New Years Weekend. Even worse, our own government stimulates these false assumptions by publishing guidelines with titles such as "Managing Transportation Resources Through the Y2K Weekend" (by the US Federal Highway Administration). The FHA published an excellent article informing the public about Y2K issues. However, the focus is limited to the time span immediately surrounding the millennium rollover on January 1. The two most commonly ignored Y2K problems Ive seen worldwide to date are: 1) failures related to leap-year processing of the Year 2000; and 2) determining which logic an application or system exercises to calculate the day of the week. Awareness is seriously lacking for these exposures. I would recommend the US government increase its awareness campaign within federal agencies to include such impact areas as contingency plans, Year 2000 public education Web sites, and the guidance documents they contain. A heightened sense of Y2K preparedness and contingency response readiness should be maintained for a one-year period beginning with third-quarter 1999, instead of just the short timeframe around the January 1 rollover.
-- Brian (email@example.com), November 03, 1999.