There has already been a lot of discussion about acuteness versus chronicity, and this is more.

This summer we discussed on this forum a conversation I had with Mr. David Keyes who was the y2k project manager for Carolina Power & Light Co.(CP&L).

Mr. Keyes said that when they remediated CP&L's generation plants, they found no significant bugs. He said there were no show stoppers. On this forum we then discussed that finding (no show-stoppers) with the seemingly incongruous predictions of the US Commerce Department and the CIA, namely that unremediated foreign nations were toast. Obviously, the CP&L findings and the governments predictions about foreign failures were at odds.

Now we know that the CP&L experience was probably universal. There were amazingly few show-stoppers in the past 4 days.

But, if I am not mistaken, Mr. Keyes also mentioned one other thing. (Even if he did not say it, it seems a safe assumption.) He said that CP&L's business systems (accounting and customer interface systems) did require remediation for continued operation and that that remediation had been accomplished.

Back to acuteness vs. chronicity, a dead manufacturing system is visible to an entire community immediately. But how long can one go with a dead accounting system? Personally, I can continue to work indefinitely without an accounting system, but in 60 days I would start getting phone calls from unpaid vendors. Even then I could continue to work and accrue billable time, but the business would be in a serious downhill slide.

Fortunately, my business is small enough that I can discard my entire accounting system if I need to. I'd need about 2 or 3 days to set up a new system. I'm small enough to pass through that net. But what about a medium size company that failed to remediate its business systems? Are medium sized companies also that nimble? I don't know. Big business, I assume, has fixed its systems, but who knows for sure?

Accounting, as much as any other area, is where computer have had the biggest effect on business efficiency. It is one area where a $1000 machine can do the work of dozens of people. Accounting is no less vital than manufacturing, but it is much easier to maintain an appearance of normalcy while in the throes of severe accounting difficulties.

I thinks it's too early to cheer remediation delinquents like Italy and some South American countries. If the CP&L experience holds true, the delinquents may yet receive their discipline.

-- Puddintame (achillesg@hotmail.com), January 04, 2000

Answers

Maybe. But, like I say, A LOT of accounting and management systems--particularly, government systems--have been under stress for months already. The US Government, who owns more code, and more old code, than anyone else in the country (possibly the world) has been in FY 2000 since October. I know--I remediated one of their systems.

-- Craig Kenneth Bryant (ckbryant@mindspring.com), January 04, 2000.

Craig, I probably need to rewrite the post for clarity's sake, but the general theme I wanted to approach were the foreign countries and the SME's (domestic and foreign) who adopted fix-on-failure. What's your thought on those? Smart or foolish?

-- Puddintame (achillesg@hotmail.com), January 04, 2000.

Foolish...but lucky. Very lucky. I don't know much of anyone who both (a) adopted pure fix-on-failure, and (b) adequately investigated and tested. Of course that was risky, and foolish. That goes back to the "insurance" arguments for preperation, which have always resonated with me. But bad strategies, sometimes, end up working anyway. And sound preparations don't always end up being required. Hey ho.

-- Craig Kenneth Bryant (ckbryant@mindspring.com), January 04, 2000.