Incredible Shrinking Commitment

Standards efforts in industry consortia often go like this. There's also the fast-track version: Because IncredibleShrinkingCommitment so frequently results in standards that nobody uses, ObjectManagementGroupRules specifically address the problem.

-- DavidFlater

The alternate view.

Aside from a single individual, there was never a commitment to do X. X died on the vine due to lack of initial commitment, not shrinking commitment. --AnonymousDonor

That could happen if X was the champion's idea to begin with and she was just dragging others along [ala StupidCollaborationKickoffMeeting ?], but there are lots of alternate explanations which all lead to the same behavior. --AnonymousDonor

Applying the 80/20 rule, 80% of the image maintenance payoff PC benefit comes with 20% of the effort, and yet the actual dividend from completion never comes except after the HeavyLifting?, on the other side of the "80% effort" hump. "Fast-in fast-out" should result in unambiguous consequences with an eye to operant conditioning; I'd suggest the use of a flame-thrower. --BenTremblay
This is an instance of the PublicGoodsDilemma.
See also: StupidCollaborationKickoffMeeting
CategoryCollaboration

EditText of this page (last edited April 25, 2003) or FindPage with title or text search