Taoman:
There is another thing that that misinformed monastic could be reffering to in all of this, but the connection is so vague and the implications so unclear that I discounted it. Lest we be doomed to endlessly hear repeats of this old issue, I will point it out here.
At the center of the disagreement between Ken and CSGI was a contract for a third company. This contract had some troubles. The stories of why and how are in dispute between the parties involved, and believe me sorting out who did what to whom when could involve one in a heap of wasted time and effort for an investor. Both sides agree with this assessment here, from what I heard, as well. It is better to get on with productive work.
There are many reasons for such a services contract to fail. Who knows to what extent whom contributed. Who cares? Everything from insufficient resources at prime or sub, poor management at either, poor communications, insufficient cooperation, clients misdirecting... the list goes on forever, can cause such failures. Every company has them at some point. I worked at PRC for years, a top notch market leader, and they had their share. So do CSC, I-NET, and any other company in this industry.
The accusations from this whole thing could boil down to about 2 things:
1) They may say: Plexus Group failed, Ken was Plexus Group, therefore somehow IAI is bad.
2) They may say: CAST was used, CAST somehow failed once, CAST is bad.
With regard to the second first, in the context of all the other successfull work using CAST for so many millions of lines of stuff in the migration days, for instance for the ARMY, with quality results... one problem contract doesn't bother me a bit as an investor. One glitch in 17 years? Get real. This is complex technology to support and implement, and requires Analysts, System Engineers, Programmers, Testers..... any part of which would be hard to muster from a small subcontractor on one small project. The second assertion is just flimsy crap.
As far as the first assertion, well Ken is a VP at IAI. IAI also has VP's to take care of client relations, productization and distribution, sales and marketing, customer support, software services, and other issues at an executive level. In fact, each of these executives has a proven track record. IAI is so far removed from what Plexus Group was that any argument of this type is rediculous. Go back to the quality issue and look at the IAI litigation track record. Even if Plexus Group had problems in this area, IAI does not.
IAI also has a CEO with an impeccable record for quality and honesty, a President who grows businesses and has a great track record and a CFO and accounting organization that is unimpeachable.
Even if you buy a story that Ken was not in the CEO of the year category at this extinct and unrelated company, responding to which I think even Ken will admit he is a man of great strengths and great weaknesses, so what? Ken is still one of the best software development managers on the planet, an innovator and a true expert in translator technology.
BTW, if I can pound my soapbox for a second....As an Engineer myself let me tell you that there is nothing so damn silly as some turkey saying to me: hey, you don't handle large groups in presentations too well... maybe you aren't such a great Engineer.Or 'gee' you aren't very dynamic in these meetings on HR policy'. !!! Idiocy!!! Most of us Engineers are Introverts. Extroverts can't program or act in other computer related technical professions nearly as well as introverts based on Meyers Briggs research and my own observations support that. In fact from my experience, they are loosers in such positions qute often. CEO's aren't usually introverts on the other hand. Real people can't be all things and do ANY well. (Technical managers bridge that gap only through effort and patience.) Mythical stories of Leonardo DaVinci excepted.
I don't think that one of these issues was what the naysayers were driving at, but if it was, it is just so feeeble and limp I can't believe it. It is also so petty and sad that it is contemptable. They seem to be criticizing CSGI as well on this, which is not consistent with either of the above attacks. I hope it had more to do with the issues addressed in previous posts. |
