Comments on: There is no such thing as best practice for Enterprise 2.0

By: mutuelle

mutuelle — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 09:28:26 +0000

I do agree with you Ross.
In fact, in the setting up of a business, there are many conflicting drivers. We can come across more than one possible ‘right’ solution.
Whether the architecture of the new business is a good choice is usually not known until many months or even years later. Changes and additions are inevitable changes after putting the original architecture to test.
Unfortunately, there is no “cookbook” for enterprise integration solutions. Most integration vendors provide methodologies and best practices, but these instructions tend to be very much geared towards the vendor-provided tool set and often lack treatment of the bigger picture, including underlying guidelines, principles and best practices.

By: Marjanne Pearson

Marjanne Pearson — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 06:10:14 +0000

I am involved in the AEC Industry (architecture, engineering, construction), where “best practices” continues to be the mantra for success. I agree with Ross and Larry Hawes: “Best practices” are, at best, examples of how others have developed and implemented competitive strategy. They are valuable in planning for resiliency, but without modification, they are unlikely to lead to differentiation.

By: Dion Hinchcliffe

Dion Hinchcliffe — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 06:04:36 +0000

Ross,
Good post and I think you do make a key point that collections of best practices can only raise you to the greatest common denominator.
However there is certainly utility in using the knowledge that’s come before you to get to that point.
In other words, you can (and should) still go after unique competitive advantages while building on the lessons learned and successful techniques of others.
Best,
Dion

By: Ross Dawson

Ross Dawson — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 17:23:22 +0000

Mark, I am absolutely not saying that you don’t study other companies and learn from their experiences, successes, and failures. As such I certainly don’t question the value of Dion’s work.
However it is a mistake to label them ‘best practices’ in the case of Enterprise 2.0. We can call them ‘lessons learned’, ‘case studies’, ‘success factors’, ‘useful practices’ or many other names.
Thanks Larry, ‘borrowed processes’ is a phrase that helps us understand why this is problematic.

By: Larry Hawes

Larry Hawes — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 17:13:47 +0000

I had basically the same reaction as you, Ross, when I read Dion’s post this afternoon. I dislike the term “best practices” and generally use “common practices” instead. Because that’s what they are — practices that are common to all organizations that ape another’s proven way of doing something.
Borrowed processes must be fit to an organization’s unique strategy, culture, and technology set. Deploying a perceived “best practice” without modification (or at least critical review) often yields a poorly performing process and never provides competitive differentiation.

By: Mark Fidelman

Mark Fidelman — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 16:44:33 +0000

I tend to agree with Dion. You need best practices in order to understand where the high bar is located and a blueprint of how to get there.
Not understanding how other companies are generating success seems counter-intuitive. Why reinvent the wheel?
Then your Iterate, refine, experiment, and learn makes a lot of sense.