Evolution of Enterprise Software Development

Mitch DennyPrincipal Consultanthttp://[email protected]

yes, that Readify!

choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case withempirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, butstill not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.5Such differences persist over time, revealing thepotent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case withempirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, butstill not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.5Such differences persist over time, revealing thepotent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.

choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case withempirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, butstill not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.5Such differences persist over time, revealing thepotent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case withempirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, butstill not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.5Such differences persist over time, revealing thepotent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.

choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case withempirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, butstill not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.5Such differences persist over time, revealing thepotent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case withempirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, butstill not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.5Such differences persist over time, revealing thepotent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.

choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.

choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.

choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.

choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.

choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.

choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.

choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.

choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.

choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.

choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.

choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.

choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.

choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.

choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.

choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.

choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.

choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.

choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.choice. Our systematic understanding of the causes of chapter choice is weak, even though theopinions expressed by experts from every corner are very strong. As is frequently the case with

empirical research, we are better at saying what is false than what is true. For example, in a highlyquantified analysis of 1,529 consumer cases in Texas, Illinois, and Pennsylvania (all filed in 1981),

Sullivan et al. tested chapter choice against a range of potential causes of the choice. They concludedthat many of the plausible and intentional determinants of choice (e.g. ability to pay, assets to protect,unsecured debt levels, state exemption levels) had little if any causal effect. What mattered more, but

still not a lot, were such factors as a recent move within the state or choice of a specialist attorney.4

The authors noted that the district of filing is far and away the most powerful predictor ofchapter choice, which is as true today as it was in 1981. Consider, for example, that during 1998 therewere 22,840 non-business filings in the Western District of Tennessee, of which 74% were chapter 13

filings. During that period there were 25,011 non-business filings in the Western District ofWashington, of which 17% were chapter 13 filings.

5Such differences persist over time, revealing the

potent but amorphous factor of “local legal culture.” There are no simple ideas or models that willcompletely account for the large variations in chapter choice–or at least no one has found them yet.

What follows is a brief description of a promising lead.

disclaimerdisclaimer

sorry.

why?

change

change > opportunity

change > opportunity > profit!

forces

forcesconsequences

forcesconsequencesstrategies

Aaarchitect classification scheme

forcesforcesfundamental, but subtle changes over timefundamental, but subtle changes over time

mobility(and by extension, connectivity)

mobility(and by extension, connectivity)

€‚ƒwork life balance

€‚ƒwork life balance

€‚ƒwork life blending

question:

is Facebook a personal or work tool?

‚ƒ

‚ƒ

‚ƒnew users = new expectations

video: video: little britainlittle britain

‚ƒif the computer says no,I’ll find another computerthat says yes.

other forces

‚ƒ(empowered users)

computing power computing power

the thing about forces . . .

consequencesconsequencesknock on effects from forcesknock on effects from forces

computerscientist

computerscientist

computerscientist

computeruser

computerscientist

computeruser

computerscientist

computeruser

vendor

computerscientist

computeruser

vendor

systemadministrator

computeruser

vendor

softwaredeveloper

systemadministrator

computeruser

vendor

softwaredeveloper

what next?

tip: who works for who?

computerscientist

computerscientist

computeruser

computerscientist

computeruser

vendor

systemadministrator

computeruser

vendor

softwaredeveloper

systemadministrator

computeruser

vendor

softwaredeveloper

question:

what about my special requirements?

systemadministrator

computeruser

vendor

softwaredeveloper

video: video: yahoo pipesyahoo pipes

see also:Microsoft PopflyGoogle App Engine?Apple Automator

implications implications implications implications

firew

all

firew

all

value onthe inside

value onthe outside

firew

all

value onthe inside

value onthe outside

Exchange, CRM,SharePoint . . .

Yahoo! Pipes,Facebook,

SalesForce . . .

firew

all

value onthe inside

value onthe outside

Exchange, CRM,SharePoint . . .

Yahoo! Pipes,Facebook,

SalesForce . . .

firew

all

value onthe inside

value onthe outside

Exchange, CRM,SharePoint . . .

Yahoo! Pipes,Facebook,

SalesForce . . .

firew

all

value onthe inside

value onthe outside

firew

all

value onthe inside

value onthe outside

firew

all

value onthe inside

value onthe outside

firew

all

value onthe inside

value onthe outside

firew

all

value onthe inside

value onthe outside

consider:Microsoft Online (Exchange/CRM)*Windows Live MeshOracle on EC2Saasu*GoGridSaaSGrid

question:

what does my techology stack look like?

major data centers(provides network, power, cooling, redundancy)

major data centers(provides network, power, cooling, redundancy)

platform vendors(provide operting systems, virtualisation)

major data centers(provides network, power, cooling, redundancy)

platform vendors(provide operting systems, virtualisation)

framework vendors(provide identity, database, general APIs)

major data centers(provides network, power, cooling, redundancy)

platform vendors(provide operting systems, virtualisation)

framework vendors(provide identity, database, general APIs)

applications(provide user functionality)

major data centers(provides network, power, cooling, redundancy)

platform vendors(provide operting systems, virtualisation)

framework vendors(provide identity, database, general APIs)

applications(provide user functionality)

major data centers(provides network, power, cooling, redundancy)

platform vendors(provide operting systems, virtualisation)

framework vendors(provide identity, database, general APIs)

tier #1 applications(provide user functionality)

tier #2 applications(provide user functionality and mashups)

strategiesstrategiesconscious decisions made to cope with or conscious decisions made to cope with or

take advantage of changetake advantage of change

get out before you’re homeless . . .

Windows Live ID & CardSpace, Yahoo!,Google, Open ID + millions more?

question:

what about Active Directory?

tip: let users control identity

User Table:UserID...

User Table:UserID...

Identity Table:UserIDIdentityTypeIDIdentityReference

Identity Table:UserIDIdentityTypeIDIdentityReference

UserRight Table:UserIDRightIDUserRightReference

UserRight Table:UserIDRightIDUserRightReference

Identity Table:UserIDIdentityTypeIDIdentityReference

Identity Table:UserIDIdentityTypeIDIdentityReference

tip: grant and revoke is key

tip: expect a platform

demo: demo: EC2 provisioningEC2 provisioning

question:

great, but what about my users?

businessmodel?

discussion points

limit your liability

rich vs. reach

the role of developers?

the role of sysadmins?

do I run a data center?

CIO vs. CTO

Thank-you!Mitch DennyPrincipal Consultant, Readifyhttp://[email protected]