Posted by asdf on 10/10/07 03:14

"Onideus Mad Hatter" <usenet@backwater-productions.net> wrote in message
news:t7lng3lr1aurhpvhrc0fei6q27hd3vjl4g@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 09:01:28 -0700, danielcarrington4@gmail.com wrote:
>
>>> Free cl00, kiddie, unless you're a teacher there's no such thing as
>>> "sub work". Keep trying to not sound like a retard though, it's kinda
>>> cute...in a pathetic sort of way.
>
>>"Sub" is usually short for "Subcontract" - it's a term used especially
>>in military and government sectors - although many private firms use
>>the "lingo" too.
>>
>>He used the word correctly.
>
> No Stupid, he didn't. If he had said SUB-CONTRACTING or OUTSOURCING
> (as it's known to everyone who isn't plainly fuckin stupid) then he
> would have used it correctly. The term "SUB WORK" is definitely NOT
> an acceptable form to use since it'll just confuse most people. In
> business it's normally a good idea to stick with terms that are
> RECOGNIZABLE, cause if potential clients can't understand what the
> fuck it is you're saying, you'll lose them.
>
> Free cl00:
> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22sub+work%22
> "sub work" comes up with an 80,000 post pittance.
>
> "outsourcing" comes up with nearly TWENTY MILLION hits:
> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=outsourcing
>
> "subcontracting" comes up with about a million hits:
> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=subcontracting&btnG=Search
>
> Now then, in the business world, which of those three terms do you
> think is best? Think slow now, don't hurt yourself.
>

[snip boring drivel]

God (or your supreme being of choice) help you if you use the same kind of
language with your clients/employer that you use here, matey boy. I for one
had no difficulty in understanding the term 'sub work'. Hmm... 'people in
glass houses'?

In the business world, *of course* you would use the term 'outsourcing'. I
am thankful though, that our language is not (yet) wholly defined by what we
can find in Google, or in the business world.

'Outsourcing' one of those lovely management-speak non-words that can be
usefully employed to encapsulate and obfuscate the true intention of an act
or acts, and hides it behind that other lovely management meaningless
non-concept catch-all of 'commercial reality'.

For example: One would 'outsource' a department or area of operation that is
too difficult for a manager to understand and hence 'manage' (let's face it,
most are dumb, or tired, or unmotivated), for that would require
*knowledge*, which requires *trust* in one's employees.

One could also 'outsource' in order to avoid having to grow and diversify
one's business into an area that one is incapable, financially,
intellectually or emotionally, of competing.

'Outsourcing' is also a handy tool for eroding one's business opportunities
deliberately for tax reasons, or to deliberately 'scale back' an unsaleable
business.

Similarly, one can reduce one's exposure to the internal intellectual
capital (which is risky... skilled people tend to move on readily... and not
too many managers would offer better pay and conditions to their people if
they can just 'outsource' more easily) on which one's business is founded by
'outsourcing'.

Or one could 'outsource' in order to turn over an employee base of which one
has lost trust, or is too old, or too unattractive, or plays bad golf... any
reason really- you just obfuscate your true motivation with the term
'outsourcing'. Brilliant.

As a manager, one can use the concept (meaninglessly) as:

- a veiled threat: "We're actioning a feasibility on outsourcing options for
your department's core business"
- a justification for lack of performance: "A reported profit correction was
made for the last fiscal while we investigated outsourcing options"
- making reduced business activities look like a success: "We sucessfully
reduced our tax burden and exposure to administrative outgoings by
outsourcing our non-core peripherals".
- justification for lack of effort: "In order to achieve optimal performance
of management through application of appropriate life balance measures, we
right-sized our effort by outsourcing our logistics" (instead of growing a
successful trucking business, with a ready made client base) :))

So, you see... 'outsourcing' is the perfect management tool. It reduces
responsibility. It can maximise (yes, it's spelled with an 's') profit for
minimal effort. It concentrates company effort on whatever pet project the
manager is currently blowing the profit on, without requiring him/her to
give up on the 4 hour lunches.

....and, rather nicely... 'outsourcing' can be used (in the business world at
least) as:

- a noun - 'I can't attend the meeting about the employee cancer scare, I'm
too busy working out the outsourcing'.
- a verb (duh) - 'Resign now, or I'm gonna outsource your ass off'
- an adjective - 'Geez that department is so outsourced'
- a pejorative - 'Man you are completely outsourced', 'He's so outsourced he
doesn't know what day it is'.

In short, the term is meaningless management wank. ...but you are right...
everyone knows what it means. It means you're paying some unfortunate bloke
(or sheila if you prefer) in a call centre on the other side of the Earth to
sit up all night doing YOUR WORK.

You see, OMD... it *is* possible to be equally badly amusing without
resorting to the pejorative, or resorting to blowing smoke up one's own
fundament... unless one is sufficiently emotionally crippled to engage in
personal attacks on the anonymous. And no, I'm not writing this at work.

(waits patiently for the 'creative snipping')

:))

[Back to original message]