In complete disregard to rule number 6, time for a current benchmark score. The links are often to the "exceptions that prove the rules".
1. Frequency. 9/10. Well actually it's 146 out of 159, but marks out of ten.

I Don't Believe in Ghosts - well that would have been the unusual title for my newspaper column or book if I had been a famous footballer
Uncommon Sense - nice, but it seems that many others already think they own the phrase.
Simple Answers to Complicated Questions - I like that, it is what we strive for, and it also echoes Darwin's Dangerous Idea
Hmm, I'm ok for now, but it's never too late to change ...
In terms of effort, what is the difference between tactical marketing and loyalty marketing?
When someone is asked to produce a file for a one-off purpose, then the quote returned is often just as small as anyone visualising the information movement would imagine. That is, you pull the data from here, you match it against this, you split it like this, then you move it to there. Easy.
Yet when asked to produce the same file, but supplied regularly, that is often not just a little harder, but sometimes orders of magnitude more difficult. Because the supplier is not being asked to produce a particular product, but instead asked to produce a process. It is the difference between asking for a widget or asking for a widget factory.
But increasingly, as the lost customer data proves, even the one-off request is going to need a full process. The world is going to slow down.


As should be perfectly clear from much of the material here, I do not abide by many of the common distinctions between the business world and the world of information technology.
Many in the business do not delve into the information technology that supports us, perhaps because they think that they cannot understand the language. There may be a lot of data to absorb, but the principles are all common sense.
But as with natural languages, things that initially appear incomprehensible can usually be explained very simply - not by a thorough memorisation of extensive vocabulary, but simply by recognising how the language is built up - the basic components of grammar and a general understanding of how things evolve.
There may appear to be major differences. For example, in our daily interactions, someone who knows the vocabulary and syntax of more than three or four languages is quite unusual in the English speaking world.
But for those who work in computing, it is quite normal to be able to write fluently in far more than that. However the non-technologist would counter: compared to German or French or Russian, the language of computing is usually exceedingly simple, with very limited vocabulary and very few rules of syntax …
… and that is exactly why everyone should be able to understand it.

