Best case Y2K

Interesting article here.
 
   THE LIKELIHOOD OF A BEST CASE SCENARIO
            Whether home improvement projects or the common, everyday situations
            in the workplace, our plans usually end up requiring more time and
            effort than we originally thought. Computer programming is no
            different. In fact, it's worse.
       
     by Michael S. Hyatt
     December  3, 1999
          
           Here's a pop quiz for you: how many times have you seen the
            "best-case scenario" of any situation come true?
           
            If you've spent any time at all living in the "real world" (you know
            what I mean: marriage, career, child-rearing, coaching a soccer
            team, preparing Thanksgiving dinner, etc.), then you know that our
            best laid plans often get blown to bits right off the bat.
           
            Or as I once heard a pastor say, "If you want to hear God laugh,
            just tell Him your plans."
        
            For example, over the years I've done a number of home improvement
            projects. Before doing any actual construction work, I plan out
            exactly how the project will proceed. I make a list of all the
            materials I need and how much time it will take. No matter how
            conservative my estimates, no matter how much I try to anticipate
            every possible problem that could occur, when I finally start doing
            the work, the project always takes twice as much time and costs
            twice as much money.
    
            I think most people can relate. Whether home improvement projects or
            the common, everyday situations in the workplace, our plans usually
            end up requiring more time and effort than we originally thought.
    
            Over the years I've also done quite a bit of software testing and
            product analysis for many computer firms. Take my word for it, when
            it comes to complex computer software, if the track record to
            complete a project was only twice the time and cost, the entire
            technology industry would be thrilled.
    
            Computer software projects, as with most aspects of modern life,
            hardly ever follow the best-case scenario.
  
            I raise this issue because virtually all of the predictions,
            projections, and prognostications we hear from government and
            business leaders about the Y2K problem are best-case scenarios. And
            as a result, the vast majority of American citizens are basing their
            personal preparation plans (or lack of plans) on these best-case
            scenarios.
  
            We are being told that Y2K-related disruptions---if any---will be minor
            and brief. So minor and brief, in fact, that no more than three days
            worth of food, water, and flashlight batteries will be needed.

            But these overly-optimistic forecasts are based on the following
           assumptions:
  
           "The basic infrastructure will surely work smoothly." If one or more of
           the following industries experience severe disruptions, even
           temporarily, we're in big trouble: electrical power, water and sewer
           service, telecommunications, oil and gas, banking, and transportation. 
  
           Every single one of these basic infrastructure industries must operate 
           smoothly during the century rollover period or else the best-case
           scenario cannot possibly happen. 
    
        "Hastily-installed and partially-tested computer systems will work fine."
        Trying to keep track of the number of Y2K repair projects that have
        missed key deadlines is like trying to keep track of Bill Clinton's
        fibs; there are just too many. Many Y2K-compliant computer systems are
        being hastily-installed with little or no testing. Technically, the
        installation of a new system is not late until it misses the final
        deadline (which is why we keep hearing, "We expect to be 100% compliant
        by the end of the year!"), but when January 1st arrives and these
        systems must put up or shut up. Common sense tells us that many of these
        partially-tested systems will indeed shut up. 
    
        "Manual contingency plans will operate just as efficiently as automated
        systems." Many organizations assume that if computer systems malfunction
        in January, they can run their businesses manually---just like they did a
        couple of decades ago. But there is a good reason companies became
        computerized in the first place: it's much more effective and efficient.
        In other words, you can get a lot more done a lot faster with a lot less
        workers. Going back to doing business with pencils and paper and
        calculators will slow things down drastically. In many firms (if not
        most) it can't be done at all. Also, most firms no longer have the
        proper tools or the trained personnel who remember how to do it. If Y2K
        problems shut down a business system, most employees will be staring at
        their blank screens without a clue of what to do next. 
       
        "Suppliers and third-party vendors will be as reliable as always." This
        could be the biggest problem of all. Many organization are focusing all
        their energies on upgrading their internal computer systems. Most don't
        have time to check the status of their critical third-party vendors.
        They are assuming their suppliers will deliver in the Year 2000 with the
        same on-time reliability as in 1999. This could prove to be a costly
        error in judgment. Our fast-paced, high-tech economy is a network of
        systems and a system of networks. Large corporations have tens of
        thousands of key vendors, with supply chains extending around the globe.
        A few broken links in this vast, just-in-time chain could wreak havoc on
        economic activity. 
     
      Each of these assumptions must come true for the best-case scenario of Y2K
      to occur. I would suggest it is very unlikely that these assumptions are
      valid.
 
      As I've written many times, the Year 2000 Computer Problem is a risk
      management issue. What are the risks that we face, and what steps should
      we take to protect our loved ones?
 
      It is impossible to calculate the precise odds of what will or will not
      fail in January, since Y2K is an unprecedented event. But because it is
      unprecedented, because we have no experience dealing with a worldwide,
      simultaneous technological tremor, it would seem the odds are rather slim
      the best case-scenario will happen.
      
      If the best-case scenario does not happen----  if some unexpected
      disruptions occur or if cascading failures are more damaging than
      anticipated---- the health and welfare of millions of people will be at risk. I
      urge you to take steps to protect your family while there yet a little
      time.
 
      Michael S. Hyatt
      Y2KPrep
      251 Second Ave. South
      Franklin, Tennessee 37064
      1-888-925-2844
      Fax: 615-794-8860
 
 
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index