Wednesday, January 10, 2007

Starting Business in Japan

Registering a new company requires that various documents be filed with different government offices and payment of a fee of about ¥200,000. There are English-speaking Japanese lawyers who specialize in navigating the bureaucratic maze for you. Expect to pay ¥250,000 for the lawyer, which means setting up a company costs in total approximately ¥450,000.

It is possible to register a company with capital of just ¥1, but most businesses will need at least several million yen to get started.

Make sure you do your homework. You may find out things are a lot more complicated than you think.

And ask yourself are you really prepared to work 20 hours a day to make it happen? If that feels like a sacrifice, maybe it itsn't for you.

Tuesday, January 09, 2007

Dreaming In Code

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_03/b4017109.htm
http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2007/01/02.html

People, Software, DNA

JoelonSoftware
People, for the most part, are not playing with their software because they want to. They’re using the software as a tool to accomplish something else that they would like to do. Maybe they are using a chat program to try and seem witty, in hopes that the person they are chatting with will want to spend time with them, so that, ultimately, they have a better chance of getting laid, so that, ultimately, their selfish DNA will get to replicate itself. Maybe they are using a spreadsheet to try and figure out if they can afford a bigger apartment, so that, ultimately, dates will be more impressed when they come over, increasing their chance of getting laid, again, benefitting the DNA. Maybe they’re working on a PowerPoint for the boss so that they will get a promotion so that they’ll have more money which they can use to rent a larger apartment that would attract mates, thus increasing their chance of getting laid, (getting the idea yet?) so the selfish DNA can replicate. Maybe they are looking for a recipe for goat cheese ravioli on the Internet, etc., etc., … DNA.

Unless they’re software reviewers for a living, they don’t really care about the software itself, and the more they notice it, the more annoyed they’re going to be.

Choices, therefore, can be good or bad. They’re good when they support the task the user is trying to accomplish fairly directly. I want to be able to choose who to chat with (duh.) They’re bad when they represent an intrusion into the user’s actual DNA-replication goals. Every few days some crappy software I can’t even remember installing pops up noisy bulletins asking me if I want to upgrade something or other. I could not care LESS. I’m doing something. Leave me alone! I’m sure that the team at Sun Microsystems who just released this fabulous new version of the Java virtual machine have been thinking about the incremental release night and day for months and months, but the other 5,000,000,000 of us here on the planet really don’t give a flying monkey. You just cannot imagine how little I want to spend even three seconds of my life thinking about whether or not to install that new JVM. Somebody out there is already firing up Gmail to tell me that the JVM mustn’t just upgrade itself “because that might break something.” Yeah, if the entire collective wisdom of the Java development team doesn’t know if it’s going to break something, how am I supposed to know? Sheeesh.

If you’re using the term simplicity to mean “grace and economy” or “elegance,” that’s terrific. A great example of this is the difference between the way you search for music on Rhapsody and the way you search for music on iTunes. Rhapsody makes you decide if you want to search for albums, tracks, or artists. iTunes doesn’t give you any choice: it just searches all fields, which works just as well and is easier. Economy means power, in this case, and it’s a feature.

On the other hand, if you’re using simplicity to mean a lack of power, a lack of features, that’s fine, if you want to be in the paper clip business, good luck with that, but the chances that your product will solve my exact problems starts to shrink and your potential market share does, too.

Saturday, January 06, 2007

The Untractable and the Unforeseen

Critical Risks in Outsourced IT Projects

Untractable Risks are those risks that resist mitigating actions, and still impact the project despite the manager's best effots to address them at the start.
  • Schedule and budget management
  • vendor staffing issues
  • difficulties arising from the newness of technology
Approach to address these issues:
Both parties should consider pre-partnering arrangements to develop detailed requirements specifications before entering into an implementation contract.
The best approach would be: To separate the requirements specification part of pre-sales work into a standalone, chargeable consulting activity.

Unforseen risks are typically overlooked or simply don;t seem likely to happen at the risk assessment stage, so that no action is taken to mitigate them. Both intractalbe and success even on projects that are subjected to a rigorous pre-project risk assessment.
  • Client Relationship Problems-its intangible nature makes it difficult to quantify and assess. "It's almost like marriage, it starts off very, very happy, everybody has a rosy picture about what's coming down the pike..."
Project managers would be well advised to pay attention to relationship issues both with their clients and within their own team at the start of the project.
Educating the clients to have a realistic exceptation of how the project will progress is a key strategy for vendor project managers.

Call it Work-Life Choices

Forget the idea of "balance". There's no single right way to divide work and personal time.
In a global economy wherein job challenges re constantly escalating, it is easy to feel overwhelmed by conflicting demands.And technology complicates matters. With your BlackBerry in hand, you can constantly be on call for everyone.

But feeling swamped is really just a default mechanism: It's what occurs when you don't face what "achieving work-life balance" really comes down to, which is making choices and living with their consequences. In fact, we would even vote to retire the term "work-life balance" and replace it with "work-life choices".

The problem is that life and work balance is suggesting that there is one right ratio for how much time you spend working and not working. There's lot of politically correct advocacy for a kind of perfect equilibrium.
But some people love working really much that they want to live a different equation, for example a 70-30 , say.
Still others want to work just enough to support a life of avocation.

There's no right or wrong here. There are just individual choices and their trade-off.