The Community for Technology Leaders
RSS Icon
Subscribe
Issue No.04 - July/August (2010 vol.12)
pp: 58-61
Phil Laplante , Penn State
ABSTRACT
<p>What do broken windows, merit systems, and cattle prods have to do with new processes and compliance rules? Can the laws of unintended consequences be used as an advantage? Find out as this nexialist explores the interconnectedness of things.</p>
INDEX TERMS
Information technology, nexialism, compliance
CITATION
Phil Laplante, "Nexialism and the Law of Unintended Consequences", IT Professional, vol.12, no. 4, pp. 58-61, July/August 2010, doi:10.1109/MITP.2010.114
REFERENCES
1. H. Rittel and M. Webber, "Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning," Policy Sciences, vol. 4, 1973, pp. 155–169.
2. B. Fr édéric, That Which is Seen and Unseen, self-published pamphlet, 1850; http://en.wikisource.org/wikiThat_Which_Is_Seen,_and_That_Which_Is_Not_Seen .
3. M. Matza, C.R. McCoy, and M. Fazlollah, "Pressure Builds on City Police for Accuracy," Philadelphia Inquirer,15 Nov. 1998; http://inquirer.philly.com/packages/crime/ html111598.asp.
4. T. Grandin and C. Johnson, Animals in Translation, Simon and Shuster, 2005.
27 ms
(Ver 2.0)

Marketing Automation Platform Marketing Automation Tool