<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Effectiveness vs. Efficiency</title>
	<atom:link href="http://edgehopper.com/effectiveness-vs-efficiency/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://edgehopper.com/effectiveness-vs-efficiency/</link>
	<description>Brain Droppings on Innovation, Creativity, and Collaboration</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 May 2012 09:19:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Did we forget how to talk to each other? &#124;</title>
		<link>http://edgehopper.com/effectiveness-vs-efficiency/comment-page-1/#comment-1106</link>
		<dc:creator>Did we forget how to talk to each other? &#124;</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Nov 2008 16:28:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chrisspagnuolo.com/PermaLink,guid,482ccd9e-e691-4cc0-9cad-f20fc497607c.aspx#comment-1106</guid>
		<description>[...] Twitter is cool. Wikis are neat. SharePoint is, hmmm, good? And email is email. These tools are all useful in helping us communicate with each other when we&#8217;re separated by great distances. They help us bridge the gap by providing fast, efficient means of communication. It doesn&#8217;t get more efficient than Twitter&#8217;s 140 character limit. But take a close look at these tools. They all share a common characteristic. They&#8217;re all based on written communication. While the written word may be very efficient for transferring information, it is not very effective at persuading people or making a real impact. And there is a tremendous difference between being efficient and being effective. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Twitter is cool. Wikis are neat. SharePoint is, hmmm, good? And email is email. These tools are all useful in helping us communicate with each other when we&#8217;re separated by great distances. They help us bridge the gap by providing fast, efficient means of communication. It doesn&#8217;t get more efficient than Twitter&#8217;s 140 character limit. But take a close look at these tools. They all share a common characteristic. They&#8217;re all based on written communication. While the written word may be very efficient for transferring information, it is not very effective at persuading people or making a real impact. And there is a tremendous difference between being efficient and being effective. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris Spagnuolo's EdgeHopper</title>
		<link>http://edgehopper.com/effectiveness-vs-efficiency/comment-page-1/#comment-348</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Spagnuolo's EdgeHopper</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2008 12:00:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chrisspagnuolo.com/PermaLink,guid,482ccd9e-e691-4cc0-9cad-f20fc497607c.aspx#comment-348</guid>
		<description>[...] course, the underlying concern in both of these cases is keeping the QA&#8217;s and the devlopers effectively utilized during an iteration. Software quality always seems to boil down to a utilization/cost equation [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] course, the underlying concern in both of these cases is keeping the QA&#8217;s and the devlopers effectively utilized during an iteration. Software quality always seems to boil down to a utilization/cost equation [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Served from: edgehopper.com @ 2012-05-17 06:55:45 -->
