Search blog.co.uk

Who is the client?
by frowningstreet @ 2005-10-18 - 20:41:09

I was queueing to buy some paper in Rymans today.

The queue was quite substantial (over 15 people), and to my surprise, there were two people, working a single till , one packing, one taking money. There were three tills.

I asked as to why they didn't run two tills, as most of the time, one or the other was totally idle (sometimes both!).

The answer was that it was 1730, and the store closed at 1830, and the other two tills had been already cashed up, in readiness to close!

So customers are made to wait, so that the store can close on time.

Simple really, once you figure out who are the clients, and who are the servers. Silly me.

Maybe someone should tell IBM to add another one of their glib posters at Airports and Waterloo, that by correctly telling clients from servers, increases in revenue can be obtained.

Adam Smith would have been delighted.

Of further amusement (possibly more seriously) was that the shop assistants behind the till didn't seem to understand what the problem was. Maybe Rymans' senior management should take a closer look at who is minding the store.

Two quotes to amuse yourself with :

Rymans’ owner Theo Paphitis says the profile of the business will change: “Partners will not be a toy shop under Rymans. It will take its place as a first class social/home office stationer.”

“We want to take some of the good things from Rymans and some of the good things from Partners and grow both businesses faster than we are at the moment.”

14-Feb-2001 (ChannelInfo.net)

1 comment | Trackback (0) | Permalink | Recommend this post
Tags: rymans ibm paphitis adam smith,

Trackback address for this post:

authimage

Comments, Trackbacks: Hide subcomments

Nicho [Visitor]

26/10/05 @ 04:55

This confusion between client and server should not come as a surprise - it is part of the new business strategy adopted some years ago in this country when we sold off the 'family silver' in the rash of privatisations of public utilities.

It used to be the case that people invested money in a company which traded and hopefully made a profit for the benefit of the shareholders. Whether it did so was a risk the investors took and so legitimised their profit.

Now we have a new business plan: the customer invests money in the company by way of increased prices post-privatisation, supposedly to finance greater efficiency or improved service, and the shareholder takes the profits. The risks are gone, so where now is the legitimacy for that profit for the shareholders?

Maybe the answer is Education, Education, Education - we should educate the public so that they are not so damn stupid as to accept these conmen that govern us. Otherwise we are in danger of confirming the observation of a prominent politician some years ago when he cautioned his parliamentary candidates before an election 'not to treat the voters as if they are as stupid as we think they are'...

Leave a comment :

Your email address will not be displayed on this site.
Your URL will be displayed.
Allowed XHTML tags: <!, p, ul, ol, li, dl, dt, dd, address, blockquote, ins, del, a, span, bdo, br, em, strong, dfn, code, samp, kdb, var, cite, abbr, acronym, q, sub, sup, tt, i, b, big, small, img>
URLs, email, AIM and ICQs will be converted automatically.
Options:
 
(Line breaks become <br />)
(Set cookies for name, email & url)
Validation code:
Please enter the above code here:
For protection from spambots (case-sensitive).

Footer

The content of this website belongs to a private person, blog.co.uk is not responsible for the content of this website.