Ekh
Elio Addict
I understand the concern for keeping news positive, but I also appreciate the value for being as open as possible when there are problems. As manager of technical PR for a chunk of GE, this was an ongoing battle. Sometimes the lawyers and engineers won, and kept things concealed -- which was fine until someone figured out things HAD been kept quiet. Sometimes it was possible to publicize something that did have some risk of failure -- and the kudos for doing that were worth it.
In this particular case, testing will take a long time. But getting the engine running -- just plain running -- is a huge milestone. If the engine is in fact operating on the dyno, Elio should trumpet that fact. It's a big deal, and, psychologically at least, suggests that they CAN make this project work. (Of course, members of this forum do believe that, don't we?). It is not necessary at this point to be specific -- today we operated between 2800 and 4800 rpm, and nothing broke -- though I for one would like to see such info.
How you handle delays and failures says a lot about your corporate culture. Nikon, for instance, refuses to admit even the most blatant technical problems with their high-end cameras -- but word eventually gets around, and if you should happen to send your camera in for a repair, gee, that unannounced problem goes away. This is characteristic of Japanese business culture; they just can't stand losing face even when the facts are obvious.
Engineering-driven organizations don't like admitting to glitches, because they think that casts doubt on their skills and on the company's credibility. But you gain huge PR points if a problem is admitted to -- when the solution has been reached, or when expectations are so high that delays give people the willies (which happens here all the time). "We thought we had the widget design perfect, but we found in testing that it wasn't. So we delayed testing while widget 2.0 was machined, and now we're hitting the original estimates plus 3%" is a terrific story to tell -- because it makes the company look honest, conscientious, open, and responsible.
Nobody should expect perfection first time every time in any engineering development project. But meeting the expectations you have set is very important, and worth a little discomfort. So on balance, if there is more than a trivial (e.g., a week or two) delay in getting testing going, or if something minor is off AND BEING FIXED, I would encourage Elio to at least acknowledge the delay. When you have been open til now, and have generally met your promises, extended silence breeds doubt.
So if you were Elio, which would you rather have -- an image of perfection, or a public that cheers you on as you fight the battles that inevitably come up?
There are plusses and minuses both ways, but I tend to encourage open communications about difficulties -- not mea culpa or breast-beating, but matter of fact, factual, "this didn't meet our initial goals, so here's what were doing about it" communications get you more points than you lose.
Again, it's a matter of culture. Elio does more than most companies to be up-front. But they are engineering-driven, and that means perfectionist and worried about looking good. The irony is that you look better with a beauty mark or two than with a botox-plastic complexion!
Here endeth the lesson.
In this particular case, testing will take a long time. But getting the engine running -- just plain running -- is a huge milestone. If the engine is in fact operating on the dyno, Elio should trumpet that fact. It's a big deal, and, psychologically at least, suggests that they CAN make this project work. (Of course, members of this forum do believe that, don't we?). It is not necessary at this point to be specific -- today we operated between 2800 and 4800 rpm, and nothing broke -- though I for one would like to see such info.
How you handle delays and failures says a lot about your corporate culture. Nikon, for instance, refuses to admit even the most blatant technical problems with their high-end cameras -- but word eventually gets around, and if you should happen to send your camera in for a repair, gee, that unannounced problem goes away. This is characteristic of Japanese business culture; they just can't stand losing face even when the facts are obvious.
Engineering-driven organizations don't like admitting to glitches, because they think that casts doubt on their skills and on the company's credibility. But you gain huge PR points if a problem is admitted to -- when the solution has been reached, or when expectations are so high that delays give people the willies (which happens here all the time). "We thought we had the widget design perfect, but we found in testing that it wasn't. So we delayed testing while widget 2.0 was machined, and now we're hitting the original estimates plus 3%" is a terrific story to tell -- because it makes the company look honest, conscientious, open, and responsible.
Nobody should expect perfection first time every time in any engineering development project. But meeting the expectations you have set is very important, and worth a little discomfort. So on balance, if there is more than a trivial (e.g., a week or two) delay in getting testing going, or if something minor is off AND BEING FIXED, I would encourage Elio to at least acknowledge the delay. When you have been open til now, and have generally met your promises, extended silence breeds doubt.
So if you were Elio, which would you rather have -- an image of perfection, or a public that cheers you on as you fight the battles that inevitably come up?
There are plusses and minuses both ways, but I tend to encourage open communications about difficulties -- not mea culpa or breast-beating, but matter of fact, factual, "this didn't meet our initial goals, so here's what were doing about it" communications get you more points than you lose.
Again, it's a matter of culture. Elio does more than most companies to be up-front. But they are engineering-driven, and that means perfectionist and worried about looking good. The irony is that you look better with a beauty mark or two than with a botox-plastic complexion!
Here endeth the lesson.
