<?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"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: How to solve any problem - 3 simple steps</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ciomind.biz/2006/11/09/how-to-solve-any-problem-3-simple-steps/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ciomind.biz/2006/11/09/how-to-solve-any-problem-3-simple-steps/</link>
	<description>Do you REALLY want to know what’s inside?</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2008 10:08:34 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Mihaï</title>
		<link>http://ciomind.biz/2006/11/09/how-to-solve-any-problem-3-simple-steps/#comment-32</link>
		<dc:creator>Mihaï</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Nov 2006 07:45:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ciomind.biz/2006/11/09/how-to-solve-any-problem-3-simple-steps/#comment-32</guid>
		<description>Personally I see some similarities between new/old teams and new/old systems

In new teams, almost all events could be called random events as they are during arranging time, and it is clear that it is the leader job to support the team

But in old teams, the expectations are higher, that's why even a random event it is not seen as it is ; in these cases we see how good is the boss in supporting the team in how he distinguishes random by repeated events.

I have a larger post in Romanian http://blog.360.yahoo.com/onofreiciuc?p=361 about how a leader should create support inside the team, by keeping the team compact; as usually on the hard times the team is disintegrating: the best are going ahead and the slowest are remaining at the end.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Personally I see some similarities between new/old teams and new/old systems</p>
<p>In new teams, almost all events could be called random events as they are during arranging time, and it is clear that it is the leader job to support the team</p>
<p>But in old teams, the expectations are higher, that&#8217;s why even a random event it is not seen as it is ; in these cases we see how good is the boss in supporting the team in how he distinguishes random by repeated events.</p>
<p>I have a larger post in Romanian <a href="http://blog.360.yahoo.com/onofreiciuc?p=361" rel="nofollow">http://blog.360.yahoo.com/onofreiciuc?p=361</a> about how a leader should create support inside the team, by keeping the team compact; as usually on the hard times the team is disintegrating: the best are going ahead and the slowest are remaining at the end.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Felix Enescu</title>
		<link>http://ciomind.biz/2006/11/09/how-to-solve-any-problem-3-simple-steps/#comment-31</link>
		<dc:creator>Felix Enescu</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Nov 2006 20:38:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ciomind.biz/2006/11/09/how-to-solve-any-problem-3-simple-steps/#comment-31</guid>
		<description>Thanks, but the post was actualy about people...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks, but the post was actualy about people&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mihaï</title>
		<link>http://ciomind.biz/2006/11/09/how-to-solve-any-problem-3-simple-steps/#comment-30</link>
		<dc:creator>Mihaï</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Nov 2006 16:47:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ciomind.biz/2006/11/09/how-to-solve-any-problem-3-simple-steps/#comment-30</guid>
		<description>Depending on the system status : new/old, there are two ways to solve problems:
a. designing, creating new solutions/systems - this is nicer
b. solving errors in existing systems - this is the uglier (as it is under stress because the system is usually online)

For a, the basic steps are:
a.1 - research
a.2 - execute/implement

For b, the basic steps are:
b.1 - research for information: error's conditions ( ... who's to blame also )
b.2 - solving / implementing solution in 2 ways:
b.2.a - repairing within existing old tools/systems
b.2.b - creating new system/solution : call (goto) a.1</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Depending on the system status : new/old, there are two ways to solve problems:<br />
a. designing, creating new solutions/systems - this is nicer<br />
b. solving errors in existing systems - this is the uglier (as it is under stress because the system is usually online)</p>
<p>For a, the basic steps are:<br />
a.1 - research<br />
a.2 - execute/implement</p>
<p>For b, the basic steps are:<br />
b.1 - research for information: error&#8217;s conditions ( &#8230; who&#8217;s to blame also )<br />
b.2 - solving / implementing solution in 2 ways:<br />
b.2.a - repairing within existing old tools/systems<br />
b.2.b - creating new system/solution : call (goto) a.1</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
