In response to the learning video created by Francois Desjardins.
In it’s most rudimentary form an implementation dip is the decrease of productivity an individual experiences when adopting an new technology. The first reaction by individuals is that a new technology would be adopted because of the promise of increased performance and productivity and that a decrease would be unacceptable. Upon further analysis it becomes evident that there is a learning curve to this technology and will temporarily decrease the performance before enhancing it. There are many factors involved that lead to this decrease but the majority are because of our anxiety about the new technology and the time it will take us to fully exploit its potential.
My experience with Implementation Dips was most evident during my years as a racing driver. Racing teams are competing to win a championship which means a constant evolution of upgrades to the car in order to be competitive. The cars I dealt with were “ground effects” cars meaning they were open wheeled racers with wings attached to produce down-force and make the car handle better in a corner. The wings are so effective that speeds are at least double what a traditional car without the this benefit is capable of achieving.
As the racing year progresses teams are constantly developing aero-kits “wings” in a wind tunnel to ensure maximum speed in a straight line as well as maximum down force in the corners. Many teams will bring new aero-kits to a race to enhance performance but are often outpaced by the other “standard” kits the teams have been running with success to that point. To many people who are not dedicated race fans this look like an incredible miscalculation in logic as the team moves down the grid in the first few races of implementation. To the team developing the car this dip in performance is expected but the time between implementation of the new kit and the increased performance benefit must be as small as possible (short dip). The harder the team works to understand the new technology the shorter the dip becomes and the rewards of increased performance are experienced in a much shorter time frame. The interesting part of racing is there are many other teams that cannot afford to develop the car at that pace, or are unwilling to suffer a decrease in performance over a few races so they don’t develop the car as quickly. Traditionally this means by the end of the season these teams are at the back of the grid looking up at the teams that understood how to implement new technologies and the cost of doing so.
This leading shopping portal has now become raindogscine.com free cialis sample one of the top lifting gear manufacturers in the world. In a study of 22 people with browse around description now order cialis online varicose veins, 22 percent of people given horse chestnut had decreased vein leakage, compared to an increase in vein leakage in the people who were given a placebo. It can be used everyday, without pfizer viagra australia Continue Shopping any sort of harm within the entire body. The downside, tadalafil for women however, is those magic blue pills are not cheap.
In upper echelon racing series like Formula 1, there is an attempt to mitigate the impact of an implementation dip by introducing improvements to the car “outside” of the racing environment. Practice sessions with new areo-kits are common before a technology is introduced into the true racing environment. Other tactics teams use are computer aided models, wind tunnels, and spare cars with evolutionary parts on them that a backup drive will test outside of the racing environment while the series is going on. Even though all of these stop-gaps have been put in place there is always a cost to implementing the new technology giving truth to the old adage “no pain, no gain”.
Reference: Desjardins, F. (2011). EDUC5105-1 Implementation Dip – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NkMStPbCHaY&feature=youtu.be