| [dfx/incl/99dfx.htm]
I just finished reading the interesting editorial "So-called Recipe for Disaster" in the October Up Front section of DESIGNFAX. I am certain Tom Peters is just trying to create a buzz and sell books. He was good in his early days ("In Search Of Excellence"), but now just rides that fame with nothing much good to say. A large group from my former company went to see him speak last year. What a waste of money. All he really talked about was how supermarkets will soon be eliminated by the Internet. Your article made me think of "The Peter Principle," a book published in the 70s. The idea was sound: A person continues to be promoted until he gets promoted into a job he can't handle; the person then languishes there as an incompetent. This concept created a huge buzz in the business world. Peter then went on to hurt his image as a great thinker by suggesting bizarre ways that people who reached their "Peter Principle" could get demoted back to the job where they were last competent. He suggested ideas like bringing your lunch to work if others eat out, driving a foreign car if others drive domestic cars, etc. He even suggested reduced grooming! Maybe Tom Peters is going over the edge too, but I think it is more likely arrogance and greed. A friend of mine was recently at an honorary lunch before one of his speaking engagements. Peters refused to answers questions about his ideas during the lunch because he was "not on the clock yet." What a guy. Anyway, I enjoyed your editorial, and I enjoy your publication. --Mark Marlowe, MBAP 1-1, RBI, Toms River, NJ Shocking sales The October Up Front "So-called Recipe for Disaster" column was very well written and hit home. In a world were there is a predominance of self-serving attitudes, it is refreshing to hear positive comments from someone who seems to have a well balanced philosophical and ethical view. I would bet that Tom Peters' sales are down, so his thinking may be to shock the public into buying his books to learn his views on this subject. It is a shame that fear is used so much to try to motivate society today. --David Piper, Analyst, Diamond J., Inc., Wichita, KS People matter Mr. Peters is not an engineer. If he were, we would be in trouble. Good relations among people matter -- not machines. Nice work, Kimberly! --Chris Carbone, Design Engineer, via email A blink in time Did Tom Peters mean 100 years instead of 10 years? What a ridiculous statement to make that "90% of white-collar jobs will be eliminated in the next 10 years." Ten years is just a blink away! --Chip Biddle, Aerospace Program Manager, Stockton, CA Robots replacing humans -- oh my! I just read your editorial about engineers being displaced by robots in the near future, and my first thought was "What, not again." In 1986 I was told by people in the CAD profession that in the near future all of the functions of my job as a circuit designer would be done automatically by computers using design rules and feeding CAD programs with specifications -- definitely by 1996. My response was more prophetic: "Not in a hundred years." The reason being is that while those computer CAD guys are busy putting in expert design rules, engineers are developing better ways to do things. The best they could hope for is to be a few years behind all the time. Today they promote circuit design systems, but the final results are pathetic, inappropriate, almost obsolete solutions. They have since discovered that a far better approach is to skip the expert system stuff altogether and hire engineers to do things. That way you get modern techniques, optimum performance and less cost. Do you think that someday soon that computers will replace magazine editors? Not in a hundred years. --J. Arthur Smith, Circuit Designer, Wisconsin SDI sound-off I read your September Up Front editorial "99 Red Balloons -- Or Are They Warheads?" with great interest. I appreciate the fact that people are calling attention to things that could-- in the long run--affect our national security or sovereignty. I've been following SDI ever since President Reagan bluffed the Russians into giving up--at least temporarily. Now all our enemies are objecting to our developing a defense, when they're the ones who want to lob missiles at us. First Russia objected to SDI. Then China jumped aboard. Now my local paper states the Group of Eight hopes "the U.S. is fully listening to the common voice of the international community." Who's out of who's mind? The best way to peace is to make it tough for others to wage war. --Name Withheld Readers: Share Your Thoughts Email comments to or write to: Designfax Editors [dfx/incl/99dfx.htm] |
Peters'