<?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: Process friction</title>
	<atom:link href="http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/2007/05/29/process-friction/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/2007/05/29/process-friction/</link>
	<description>Using design to influence behaviour</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 15:13:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Ben Hyde</title>
		<link>http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/2007/05/29/process-friction/comment-page-1/#comment-64688</link>
		<dc:creator>Ben Hyde</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jun 2007 12:39:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/2007/05/29/process-friction/#comment-64688</guid>
		<description>Oh, thanks!

Interesting point about cold/hot.  I use the term condense as short hand for progress where-by a set of diverse practices around some activity settles into very standardized practices.  Some see the process of standardization as efficiency creating while others see it as driving out diversity.  Of course once you get things standardized then the volume of activity is easier to scale up; and that certainly seems like heat.  I&#039;m more fixated on how the killing off of the diversity and the frictions around that diversity are part of the standardization process; that I see as chilling - freezing out the variability.  Driving out the water?

I just love this blog&#039;s title!  I guess I&#039;ll need to poke around and see what there is to see here.  Standardization and it&#039;s complement regulation are certainly about controlling behaviors; and all the talk of safety and efficiency, best practice found around them are all well and good but not to be taken without a grain of salt.  We tend to have a fetish about efficiency.

Koranteng&#039;s the bomb!  Ain&#039;t he?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh, thanks!</p>
<p>Interesting point about cold/hot.  I use the term condense as short hand for progress where-by a set of diverse practices around some activity settles into very standardized practices.  Some see the process of standardization as efficiency creating while others see it as driving out diversity.  Of course once you get things standardized then the volume of activity is easier to scale up; and that certainly seems like heat.  I&#8217;m more fixated on how the killing off of the diversity and the frictions around that diversity are part of the standardization process; that I see as chilling &#8211; freezing out the variability.  Driving out the water?</p>
<p>I just love this blog&#8217;s title!  I guess I&#8217;ll need to poke around and see what there is to see here.  Standardization and it&#8217;s complement regulation are certainly about controlling behaviors; and all the talk of safety and efficiency, best practice found around them are all well and good but not to be taken without a grain of salt.  We tend to have a fetish about efficiency.</p>
<p>Koranteng&#8217;s the bomb!  Ain&#8217;t he?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan</title>
		<link>http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/2007/05/29/process-friction/comment-page-1/#comment-64176</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2007 05:12:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/2007/05/29/process-friction/#comment-64176</guid>
		<description>Thanks - I did think someone might just call me out about that, but the WD-40 can was more iconic as a &#039;freer of sticky mechanisms&#039; than a bottle of Halfords&#039; cycle oil (which was the next closest thing to hand). I know WD-40&#039;s mostly for driving out water, but surely it has some lubrication ability?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks &#8211; I did think someone might just call me out about that, but the WD-40 can was more iconic as a &#8216;freer of sticky mechanisms&#8217; than a bottle of Halfords&#8217; cycle oil (which was the next closest thing to hand). I know WD-40&#8217;s mostly for driving out water, but surely it has some lubrication ability?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt Platte</title>
		<link>http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/2007/05/29/process-friction/comment-page-1/#comment-64117</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt Platte</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2007 00:09:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://architectures.danlockton.co.uk/2007/05/29/process-friction/#comment-64117</guid>
		<description>Notice that the WD-40 can doesn&#039;t say &quot;lubricant&quot;.  If you want your moving parts to /stay/ squeak-free, you&#039;ll want to add a lubricant after cleaning with WD-40.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Notice that the WD-40 can doesn&#8217;t say &#8220;lubricant&#8221;.  If you want your moving parts to /stay/ squeak-free, you&#8217;ll want to add a lubricant after cleaning with WD-40.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 2.312 seconds -->
