Probably the biggest example of organizations demending, or at least planning on, conformity and a single way of thinking is that company microsoft. Yes, they provide a thousand ways to change the colors and fonts, but the software is constantly hanging when one does not do things the way that their programmers think that they should be done. So for those of us who don't follow the microsopht form, it is a fight to make the programs work. The presumption appears to be that, if you do one thing, you will only try to do it in one certain way, which is usually not the way that I want to do things. That is probably why Gates has so many who don't like him at all.
The critical comments that come from others, aimed at those who don't conform to being just like everybody else. But a caution here is that when I say different, I mean still within all standards of moral and ethical behavior, as opposed to those who are different in that they elect to disregard moral and ethical standards as well as common decency. So there is a big difference in differences.
Probably that last paragraph is a bit confusing , I am certain that it will be taken as a personal affront by those not mentioned. Which is why they were not mentioned by name or description.
The manuals I edited were actually for telephone line diagnostic equipment. You look at circuit diagrams for fun, I used to read dictionaries for fun. It's enjoying the use of the tools of one's trade. Not sure what's demented about that.
Wow! I had one of those manuals a few years ago that went back through the old mechanical dial phones. It gave detailed circuits for a whole bunch of them.
Unfortunately I loaned it to a person who had no concept of the value it contained, and he lost it. I don't anticipate ever being able to obtain another copy, since they were obsolete when I got them.
But they were great for restoring antique and "classic" phones that I had collected. They were much easier than reverse engineering and then guessing at how things should be connected. Not the sort of thing that many folks would do, but then, I am one of those who reads circuit drawings for fun. Some call that quite demented.
Ah, so you too did some tech writing. The operation manuals I wrote and edited were aimed at what used to be called "craft" in the old telephone system days. These were service/repair guys. But I had to circulate the new/updated copies to the internal engineering staff who, I'm sorry to say, always wanted to complicate things with theoretical side remarks, or had outdated, or just incorrect, ideas about language use and the established principles of instruction and communication. Many of the changes they wanted to make would confuse users, not clarify things. Anyway, it was quite a challenge.
Ann, I still do a bit of technical writing, but not so often as I used to. It is still an interesting challenge to create an explanation of exactly what a circuit does, component by component. Mostly that information is for the benefit of service people who need to understand how something works.
Using wireless chips and accessories, engineers can now extract data from the unlikeliest of places -- pumps, motors, bridges, conveyors, refineries, cooling towers, parking garages, down-hole drills and just about anything else that can benefit from monitoring.
With strong marketplace demand for qualified engineers across the board that currently outstrips the available supply, there may never be a better time for engineers and project managers to advance their careers and salaries. Whether those moves are successful in the short-term and long-term is likely to depend on how the transition from one job to the next is handled.
Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.