<?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"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: SEMPER and SCORE</title>
	<atom:link href="http://tetradianbooks.com/2008/07/semper/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://tetradianbooks.com/2008/07/semper/</link>
	<description>For different readers - and different reading</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 07:31:07 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cesar Mercado</title>
		<link>http://tetradianbooks.com/2008/07/semper/#comment-429</link>
		<dc:creator>Cesar Mercado</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Mar 2011 21:17:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tetradianbooks.com/?p=24#comment-429</guid>
		<description>First of all, I&#039;d like to say that most of the ideas I have read in your books have resonated in me. Also, I find your insightful and bold approach quite refreshing.

Nevertheless, I have to say I disagree with your discussion of &#039;Effectiveness&#039;. 

For starters, I don&#039;t think it should include &#039;Efficiency&#039;, which is more of a companion quality when it comes to performance. You can be effective without being efficient, and vice versa.

&#039;Elegance&#039; is another sub-quality that I tend to associate with efficency rather than effectiveness. Because nothing is more efficient that a hands-off approach if you can get away with it--zero sweat, full accomplishment.

From another perspective, I believe that &#039;Efficiency&#039; and &#039;Effectiveness&#039; are at the same level of abstraction, so I find it difficult to put efficiency within effectiveness.

Why not start with the standard dictionary definition and elaborate on it? Thus, effectiveness is the quality that enables you to &#039;hit the mark&#039;, &#039;achieve results&#039;, etc. It doesn&#039;t matter whether you do it efficiently or elegantly.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>First of all, I&#8217;d like to say that most of the ideas I have read in your books have resonated in me. Also, I find your insightful and bold approach quite refreshing.</p>
<p>Nevertheless, I have to say I disagree with your discussion of &#8216;Effectiveness&#8217;. </p>
<p>For starters, I don&#8217;t think it should include &#8216;Efficiency&#8217;, which is more of a companion quality when it comes to performance. You can be effective without being efficient, and vice versa.</p>
<p>&#8216;Elegance&#8217; is another sub-quality that I tend to associate with efficency rather than effectiveness. Because nothing is more efficient that a hands-off approach if you can get away with it&#8211;zero sweat, full accomplishment.</p>
<p>From another perspective, I believe that &#8216;Efficiency&#8217; and &#8216;Effectiveness&#8217; are at the same level of abstraction, so I find it difficult to put efficiency within effectiveness.</p>
<p>Why not start with the standard dictionary definition and elaborate on it? Thus, effectiveness is the quality that enables you to &#8216;hit the mark&#8217;, &#8216;achieve results&#8217;, etc. It doesn&#8217;t matter whether you do it efficiently or elegantly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

