Bringing A Better Design Process To Your Organization

first_img Posted on 21st August 2019Web Design FacebookshareTwittertweetGoogle+share Outsourcing to software vendors (Large preview)Certainly, we should treat colleagues and vendors with respect and make reasonable requests. That doesn’t mean, however, that it’s necessary to surrender all leverage as happened during my tenure at a large finance firm.While working at this firm as a UX designer, I frequently encountered this dynamic:Manager: “Hey, Eric can you evaluate this claims software that we’re planning to buy? We just want to make sure it works as intended.”Me: “Sure, I’ll send you my preliminary findings by the end of the week.”Manager: “Great”The following week:Manager: “Thanks for the review. I see that you found three serious issues: Hard to find the number for an existing claim, screens with too much text that are hard to read, and the difficulty of returning to a previous screen when processing a new claim. That is concerning. Do you think those issues will hinder productivity?”Me: “Yes, I think these issues will increase stress and processing time in the Claims Center. I’m quite concerned because my previous work with Janet’s team demonstrated that the Claims Center reps are already highly stressed.”Manager: “Really good to know. I just sent the check. I’ll ask the vendor to fix the problems before they ship.”Me (screaming inside): “Noooooooooooooo!”This well-intentioned manager did precisely the wrong thing. He asked for changes after sending the check. No surprise that the vendor never made the requested changes. Why would they? They had their money.Not only did this scenario play out repeatedly at that company, but I’ve witnessed it throughout my UX career.SolutionThe solution is clear. If the vendor product does not meet customer and business needs, and the changes you request are within scope, don’t pay until the vendor makes the changes. It really is that simple.ConclusionIn this piece, we’ve identified four common barriers to quality design and corresponding solutions:Complex regulations and standardsThe solution is to acknowledge and address complexity by devising realistic timelines and sufficient budget for research and iterative design.Shipping software with bugs with a promise to fix them laterThe solution is to avoid next-release syndrome and address serious problems now. Persuade decision-makers by re-defining the meaning of value within your organization.Insufficient time for design iterationsThe solution is to include design spikes in the agile development process. These bubbles of time temporarily take the place of a sprint and allow designers to focus on complex UX issues.Relying too heavily on vendorsThe solution is to retain leverage by withholding final payment until the vendor makes requested changes as long as these changes are within the original project scope.The fourth solution is straightforward. While the first three are not easy, they are concrete because they can be applied directly to existing design processes. Their implementation does not require a massive reorganization or millions of dollars. It simply requires commitment to delivering a better experience. (ah, il)From our sponsors: Bringing A Better Design Process To Your Organization The EMR systems are clunky, inflexible, and hard to customize. Ugent, for instance, cannot embed photos directly into his chart notes. Instead, he must open the folder with the photo of the mole and then open a different folder to see the text. This setup is particularly cumbersome for dermatologists who rely heavily on photos when treating patients.Ugent succinctly summarizes the problem with EMRs:“The people who design it [the EMR system] don’t understand my workflow. If they did, they would design a different system.”Doctors are not alone in their frustration with clunky software. Consumers and professionals around the world make similar complaints:“Why can’t I find what I need?”“Why do they make it so hard?”“Why do I have to create a login when I simply want to buy this product. I’m giving them money. Isn’t that enough?”A major contributor to clunky software is flawed design processes. In this article, we’ll outline four design process problems and explain how to address them.ComplexityNext-Release SyndromeInsufficient Time For Design IterationsSurrendering Control To Outside Vendors1. ComplexityScale, multiple stakeholders, and the need for sophisticated code are among the many factors contributing to the complexity of large software projects.Sometimes overlooked, however, are complex laws and regulations. For example, insurance is heavily regulated at the state level, adding a layer of complexity for insurance companies operating in multiple states. Banks and credit unions are subject to regulation while utilities must comply with state and federal environmental laws.Healthcare products and software subject to FDA regulations offer an even greater challenge. The problem isn’t that the regulations are unreasonable. Safety is paramount. The issues are time, budget, and the planning necessary to meet FDA requirements.As Jeff Horvath, Ph.D., a UX consultant with extensive experience in healthcare, explains: “These requirements add a couple of orders of magnitude to the rigor for writing test protocols, test setup, data gathering, analysis, quality controls, and getting approval to conduct the research in the first place.” For example, a single round of usability testing jumps from six weeks (a reasonable time frame for a standard usability test) to six months. And that’s with a single round of usability testing. Often, two or more rounds of testing are necessary.This level of rigor is a wakeup call for companies new to working with the FDA. More than once, Horvath has faced tough conversations with clients who were unprepared for the extended timelines and additional budget necessary to meet FDA requirements. It’s hard, but necessary. “It pays to be thorough,” says Horvath. In 2018 the FDA approved a mere 11% of pre-market submissions.The demands on researchers, designers, and developers are higher for healthcare software requiring FDA compliance than for traditional software products. For example:A UX researcher can only conduct one or two usability test sessions per day as opposed to the more common five to six sessions per day for standard software.UX designers must remain hyper-attentive to every aspect of the user’s interaction with software. Even one confusing interaction could cause a clinician to make an error that could jeopardize a patient’s health. For the same reason, UI designers must draw interfaces that remain faithful to every interaction.A longer time frame for design and usability testing means that the developer’s coding efforts must be planned carefully. Skilled and well-intentioned developers are often eager to modify the code as soon as new information becomes available. While this approach can work in organizations well practiced in rapid iteration, it carries risk when designing and coding complex systems.Failure to manage complexity can have fatal consequences as happened when Danielle McCray was admitted to Tallahassee Memorial Hospital as she was about to give birth. To ease her discomfort, healthcare workers connected her to a patient-controlled analgesia machine, a programmable infusion pump.Eight hours later McCray was pronounced dead from a morphine overdose. A major factor in this tragedy was the flawed design of the infusion pump used to administer medication. The pump required 27 programming steps. Failure to address such complexity by designing a more intuitive user interface contributed to unnecessary death.SolutionThe solution is to acknowledge and address complexity This point sounds logical. Yet, as explained above, complicated FDA regulations often surprise company leaders. Denial doesn’t work. Failing to plan means your organization will likely fall into the 89% of pre-market submissions the FDA rejected in 2018.When conducting usability tests, user experience researchers must take three steps to manage the complexity associated with FDA regulations:The moderator (the person who runs the usability test) must be hyper-attentive. For example, if an MRI scan requires a technician to follow a strict sequence of steps while using the associated software, the moderator must observe carefully to determine if the participant follows the instructions to the letter. If not, the task is rated as a failure meaning that both the interface design and associated documentation will require modification;The moderator must also track close calls. For example, a participant might initially perform the steps out of order, discover the mistake, and recover by following the proper sequence. The FDA considers this a near miss, and the moderator must report it as such;The moderator must also assess the participant’s knowledge. Does she believe that she has followed the proper sequence? Is this belief accurate?2. Next-Release SyndromeOne factor in the failure to acknowledge complexity is a fix-it-later mindset we call next-release syndrome. Software bugs are not a problem because “we’ll fix that in the next release.” The emphasis on speed over quality and safety makes it all too easy to postpone solving the hard problems.Anyone involved in product design and development must tackle next-release syndrome. Two examples make the point:We discovered serious design flaws with a client’s healthcare tracking software. The company chose to release the software without addressing these problems. Not surprisingly, customers were unhappy.We conducted usability tests for a large credit union based in the U.S. The participants were seasoned financial advisers. Testing revealed serious design flaws including confusing status icons, buttons with an unclear purpose, and a nearly hidden link that prevented participants from displaying important data. Remember, if the user doesn’t see it, it’s not there. When we reported the findings, the response was: “We’ll fix that in the next release.” As expected, the web application was not well received. Responses from users included: “Why did you ask us to review the app if you had no intention of making changes?”Solution: Reject The Fix-It-Next-Time MentalityThe solution is to address serious design problems now. Sounds straightforward. But, how do you convince decision-makers to change the entrenched “fix-it-later” mindset?The key is to shift the conversation about achievement away from product delivery toward the value created. For example, teams that take the time to revise a design based on user research are likely to see better customer reactions and, over time, increased customer loyalty.Strengthen the case by using quantitative data to show decision-makers the direct connection between user research and increased revenue and a positive customer experience. HomeWeb DesignBringing A Better Design Process To Your Organization Related postsInclusive Components: Book Reviews And Accessibility Resources13th December 2019Should Your Portfolio Site Be A PWA?12th December 2019Building A CSS Layout: Live Stream With Rachel Andrew10th December 2019Struggling To Get A Handle On Traffic Surges10th December 2019How To Design Profitable Sales Funnels On Mobile6th December 2019How To Build A Real-Time Multiplayer Virtual Reality Game (Part 2)5th December 2019 Use data to connect research and design improvements to specific business goals (Large preview)Re-defining value is, in effect, a process improvement because it establishes a new set of priorities that better serve customers and your company’s long-term interests. As McKinsey reports in The Business Value of Design: “Top-quartile companies embrace the full user experience; they break down internal barriers among physical, digital, and service design.”3. Insufficient Time For Design IterationsRelated to the next-release syndrome is insufficient time to iterate the design based on research findings or changing business requirements. “We don’t have time for that,” is the common refrain from developers and product owners. Designers working in Agile environments are frequently pressured to avoid “holding up” the development team.Development speeds along, and the software is released. We’ve all seen the results from confusing phone apps, to clunky medical records software, to the cumbersome user interface for financial advisers referenced above.Solution: Design SpikesOne solution comes from the coding world. In his article “Fitting Big-Picture UX Into Agile Development”, Damon Dimmick offers the idea of design spikes, “bubbles of time that allow designers to focus on complex UX issues.” They fit into the Scrum framework by temporarily taking the place of a regular sprint. Design iteration (Large preview)Design spikes offer several advantages:They allow UX teams to focus on holistic issues and avoid getting bogged down in granular design issues that are sometimes emphasized within a single sprint;They offer the opportunity to explore complex UX questions from a high level. If needed, the UX design team can also engage in design-centric thinking at any point in order to solve larger UX challenges;By adopting design spikes, UX teams can leverage the same flexibility that development teams use in the agile process and devote the time needed to focus on design issues that don’t always fit well into a standard scrum sprint;Development unlikely to be affected by design decisions can proceed.Naturally, design iterations often affect certain parts of the code for a site, app, or software product. For this reason, during design spikes any code that will likely be affected by the design spike cannot move forward. But, as Dimmick clearly states, this “delay” will likely save time by avoiding re-work. It simply does not make sense to write code now and then re-write it a few weeks later after the team has agreed on a revised design. In short, postponing some coding actually saves time and budget.4. Relying Too Heavily On VendorsAddressing complexity, resisting next-release syndrome, and allowing time for iteration are essential to an effective design process. For many firms, another consideration is their relationship with software vendors. These vendors play an important, even critical, role in development. Yet, granting them too much leverage makes it difficult to control your own product. Bringing A Better Design Process To Your OrganizationYou are here: Bringing A Better Design Process To Your Organization Bringing A Better Design Process To Your Organization Eric Olive 2019-08-21T13:30:59+02:00 2019-08-21T12:36:12+00:00As user experience (UX) designers and researchers, the most common complaint we hear from users is:“Why don’t they think about what I need?”In fact, many organizations have teams dedicated to delivering what users and customers need. More and more software developers are eager to work with UX designers in order to code interfaces that customers will use and understand. The problem is that complex software projects can easily become bogged down in competing priorities and confusion about what to do next.The result is poor design that impedes productivity. For example, efficiency in healthcare is hampered by electronic medical records (EMRs). Complaints about these software systems are legion. Dr. Steven Ugent, a Boston-based dermatologist and Yale Medical School alumnus, is no exception.Since 2010, Dr. Ugent has used two EMR systems: Before 2010, he finished work promptly at 5:15 every day. Since he and his colleagues started using EMRs, he typically works an extra half hour to 1.5 hours in the evening. “I don’t know any doctor who is happy with their medical records system. The crazy thing is that I was much more efficient when I was using pen and paper.”last_img read more

Trump’s pick to head White House science office gets good reviews

first_img Trump’s pick to head White House science office gets good reviews Sue Ogrocki/Associated Press By David MalakoffJul. 31, 2018 , 6:20 PM The long wait for a White House science adviser is over. President Donald Trump announced today that he intends to nominate meteorologist Kelvin Droegemeier, a university administrator and former vice-chair of the governing board of the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF), to be director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP). The OSTP director traditionally, but not always, also holds the title of the president’s science adviser.The move caps a search process of record-setting length—nearly 560 days, double the longest time taken by any other modern president to name an OSTP director. Many in the research community had lamented the delay. But the wait may have been worth it: Droegemeier, a respected veteran of the Washington, D.C., policymaking scene, is getting positive reviews from science and university groups.“He’s a very good pick. … He has experience speaking science to power,” says environmental policy expert John Holdren, who served as science adviser under former President Barack Obama and is now at Harvard University. “I expect he’ll be energetic in defending the R&D budget and climate change research in particular.”Sign up for our daily newsletterGet more great content like this delivered right to you!Country *AfghanistanAland IslandsAlbaniaAlgeriaAndorraAngolaAnguillaAntarcticaAntigua and BarbudaArgentinaArmeniaArubaAustraliaAustriaAzerbaijanBahamasBahrainBangladeshBarbadosBelarusBelgiumBelizeBeninBermudaBhutanBolivia, Plurinational State ofBonaire, Sint Eustatius and SabaBosnia and HerzegovinaBotswanaBouvet IslandBrazilBritish Indian Ocean TerritoryBrunei DarussalamBulgariaBurkina FasoBurundiCambodiaCameroonCanadaCape VerdeCayman IslandsCentral African RepublicChadChileChinaChristmas IslandCocos (Keeling) IslandsColombiaComorosCongoCongo, The Democratic Republic of theCook IslandsCosta RicaCote D’IvoireCroatiaCubaCuraçaoCyprusCzech RepublicDenmarkDjiboutiDominicaDominican RepublicEcuadorEgyptEl SalvadorEquatorial GuineaEritreaEstoniaEthiopiaFalkland Islands (Malvinas)Faroe IslandsFijiFinlandFranceFrench GuianaFrench PolynesiaFrench Southern TerritoriesGabonGambiaGeorgiaGermanyGhanaGibraltarGreeceGreenlandGrenadaGuadeloupeGuatemalaGuernseyGuineaGuinea-BissauGuyanaHaitiHeard Island and Mcdonald IslandsHoly See (Vatican City State)HondurasHong KongHungaryIcelandIndiaIndonesiaIran, Islamic Republic ofIraqIrelandIsle of ManIsraelItalyJamaicaJapanJerseyJordanKazakhstanKenyaKiribatiKorea, Democratic People’s Republic ofKorea, Republic ofKuwaitKyrgyzstanLao People’s Democratic RepublicLatviaLebanonLesothoLiberiaLibyan Arab JamahiriyaLiechtensteinLithuaniaLuxembourgMacaoMacedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic ofMadagascarMalawiMalaysiaMaldivesMaliMaltaMartiniqueMauritaniaMauritiusMayotteMexicoMoldova, Republic ofMonacoMongoliaMontenegroMontserratMoroccoMozambiqueMyanmarNamibiaNauruNepalNetherlandsNew CaledoniaNew ZealandNicaraguaNigerNigeriaNiueNorfolk IslandNorwayOmanPakistanPalestinianPanamaPapua New GuineaParaguayPeruPhilippinesPitcairnPolandPortugalQatarReunionRomaniaRussian FederationRWANDASaint Barthélemy Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da CunhaSaint Kitts and NevisSaint LuciaSaint Martin (French part)Saint Pierre and MiquelonSaint Vincent and the GrenadinesSamoaSan MarinoSao Tome and PrincipeSaudi ArabiaSenegalSerbiaSeychellesSierra LeoneSingaporeSint Maarten (Dutch part)SlovakiaSloveniaSolomon IslandsSomaliaSouth AfricaSouth Georgia and the South Sandwich IslandsSouth SudanSpainSri LankaSudanSurinameSvalbard and Jan MayenSwazilandSwedenSwitzerlandSyrian Arab RepublicTaiwanTajikistanTanzania, United Republic ofThailandTimor-LesteTogoTokelauTongaTrinidad and TobagoTunisiaTurkeyTurkmenistanTurks and Caicos IslandsTuvaluUgandaUkraineUnited Arab EmiratesUnited KingdomUnited StatesUruguayUzbekistanVanuatuVenezuela, Bolivarian Republic ofVietnamVirgin Islands, BritishWallis and FutunaWestern SaharaYemenZambiaZimbabweI also wish to receive emails from AAAS/Science and Science advertisers, including information on products, services and special offers which may include but are not limited to news, careers information & upcoming events.Required fields are included by an asterisk(*)center_img Kelvin Droegemeier Maria Zuber, a planetary geophysicist and vice president for research at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, agrees that Droegemeier will stand up for climate science. “He always has. I see no reason why he wouldn’t now.” But she says his style is not confrontational. “He’s a good old boy. He wears cowboy boots. … He’s a personable guy.” She adds that “he’s got solid conservative credentials,” noting that his web page is emblazoned with “God Bless America!!!”“He is an excellent choice,” says Tobin Smith, vice president for policy at the Association of American Universities in Washington, D.C. “He has a strong understanding of issues of concern to research universities.”“Kelvin is a solid scientist, excellent with people, and with deep experience with large bureaucracies,” says Cliff Mass, an atmospheric scientist at the University of Washington in Seattle. “A moderate voice that won’t politicize the science.”Droegemeier, who has served on the faculty of The University of Oklahoma (OU) in Norman for 33 years and been the school’s vice president for research since 2009, has long been rumored to be in the running for the OSTP job, which entails advising the president on technical issues and overseeing coordination of federal science policy. He is no stranger to Washington, D.C.; then-President George W. Bush named him to the National Science Board, which oversees NSF, in 2004, and Obama reappointed him in 2011. He served as the board’s vice-chair from 2014 to 2017.He has also served as a formal and informal adviser to federal and state politicians. He leads a state science advisory panel named by Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin, and advised former Oklahoma Representative Jim Bridenstine (R), now the administrator of NASA. Recently, he helped craft federal legislation aimed at bolstering weather forecasting that Congress passed last year with bipartisan support. Those connections—as well as his links to David Boren, a former Democratic senator from Oklahoma who last month retired from the OU presidency—likely helped bring Droegemeier’s name to the attention of the Trump administration.A serious scientistDroegemeier, who is 59, earned his Ph.D. in atmospheric science from the University of Illinois in Urbana in 1985. As a researcher, he focused on numerical weather forecasting, including studies of thunderstorm dynamics, and helped develop the use of supercomputers to run atmospheric models. He helped found and lead two NSF-funded centers: One focused on the analysis and prediction of storms, the other was a hub for “collaborative adaptive sensing of the atmosphere.” His most cited paper—with 1066 citations—described a “multi-scale nonhydrostatic atmospheric simulation and prediction model” and was published in 2000 in the journal Meteorology and Atmospheric Physics.“His command of both science and policy issues is nearly unmatched in the community,” says Roger Wakimoto, vice chancellor for research at the University of California, Los Angeles, and president of the American Meteorological Society in Boston. Wakimoto says he has known Droegemeier since graduate school and predicts he will be “a superb spokesperson for the community.”“Kelvin is one of the most respected colleagues in the field of meteorology but also has the experience and savvy to interact at the highest policy levels,” adds Marshall Shepherd, an atmospheric scientist at the University of Georgia in Athens and chair of NASA’s Earth Sciences Advisory Committee.Challenges aheadIf confirmed by the Senate, Droegemeier will take the helm of an office that has been buffeted by change and uncertainty. Under Obama, OSTP’s staff grew to some 135 people, and it was active in shaping budget and policy plans, particularly in the climate change arena. Under Trump, OSTP’s staff plummeted to about 35 last year but has since grown to about 60 under the leadership of its de facto head, OSTP Deputy Chief Technology Officer Michael Kratsios.Holdren says Droegemeier has “a big challenge ahead of him. … I look forward to seeing what he’s able to accomplish in a very challenging circumstance.” Trump has a reputation for ignoring expert advice. But “it could well be that [Droegemeier is] thinking: ‘Here’s a chance to make a small difference and to at least be a small voice of reason,’” says Rick Anthes, president emeritus of the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado.One of Droegemeier’s first tasks, Holdren says, will be to develop strong working relationships with other senior White House staff, including the head of the Office of Management and Budget, which oversees the annual budget request to Congress. Thus far, Holdren believes Trump’s budget requests, which have called for large cuts in some science agencies, “reflect that weakness of not having a senior scientist engaged as an equal in that process.” Another task, Holdren believes, will be “rebuilding the science part” of OSTP, which under Trump has emphasized technology and workforce issues.“Having such a strong leader. … as head of OSTP is essential to ensuring science is a key factor considered in the policymaking process,” says Peter McPherson, president of the Association of Public and Land-grant Universities in Washington, D.C. “All Americans are better off when science has a seat at the table.”Mostly, researchers are relieved that science will finally have some voice in the White House. “I wish it had happened a lot earlier,” Holdren says. “But on the other hand, many of us weren’t sure it would ever happen.”With reporting by Adrian Cho, Eric Hand, Jocelyn Kaiser, and Paul Voosen.last_img read more

Argentine scientists rally behind favorite in Sunday’s presidential election

first_img By Lindzi WesselOct. 25, 2019 , 9:00 AM Argentine scientists rally behind favorite in Sunday’s presidential election Alberto Fernández Thousands of Argentine scientists are hoping the man expected to be the country’s next president will reverse deep cuts to research imposed by the conservative government of President Mauricio Macri. But the first priority for Alberto Fernández, the front-runner in Sunday’s election, will almost certainly be Argentina’s crumbling economy. And it’s not clear when—or how effectively—the concerns of scientists will be addressed.Fernández, a 60-year-old lawyer and political insider, worked for former President Nestor Kirchner and, for a short time, under Cristina Fernández de Kirchner after she succeeded her husband in 2007. Despite a decadeslong rift between Fernández and Cristina Kirchner, she is now his running mate, and the presidential candidate is expected to continue her brand of populism, whose roots go back almost 70 years to the rule of Juan Peron. Polls show Fernández leading Macri by a wide margin; Fernández will gain the presidency if he captures more than 45% of the vote in a six-person field, or wins 40% of the vote and leads by at least 10 percentage points.Kirchner won the support of many scientists by creating Argentina’s first Ministry of Science. She also increased the number of student scholarships and pledged to create more jobs within the National Scientific and Technical Research Council (CONICET). Elected in November 2015, Macri eliminated the science ministry and cut new CONICET jobs to less than one-third the level that Kirchner had targeted by this year. Other cuts have left research labs struggling to cover basic services such as routine maintenance and the cost of electricity and security.Sign up for our daily newsletterGet more great content like this delivered right to you!Country *AfghanistanAland IslandsAlbaniaAlgeriaAndorraAngolaAnguillaAntarcticaAntigua and BarbudaArgentinaArmeniaArubaAustraliaAustriaAzerbaijanBahamasBahrainBangladeshBarbadosBelarusBelgiumBelizeBeninBermudaBhutanBolivia, Plurinational State ofBonaire, Sint Eustatius and SabaBosnia and HerzegovinaBotswanaBouvet IslandBrazilBritish Indian Ocean TerritoryBrunei DarussalamBulgariaBurkina FasoBurundiCambodiaCameroonCanadaCape VerdeCayman IslandsCentral African RepublicChadChileChinaChristmas IslandCocos (Keeling) IslandsColombiaComorosCongoCongo, The Democratic Republic of theCook IslandsCosta RicaCote D’IvoireCroatiaCubaCuraçaoCyprusCzech RepublicDenmarkDjiboutiDominicaDominican RepublicEcuadorEgyptEl SalvadorEquatorial GuineaEritreaEstoniaEthiopiaFalkland Islands (Malvinas)Faroe IslandsFijiFinlandFranceFrench GuianaFrench PolynesiaFrench Southern TerritoriesGabonGambiaGeorgiaGermanyGhanaGibraltarGreeceGreenlandGrenadaGuadeloupeGuatemalaGuernseyGuineaGuinea-BissauGuyanaHaitiHeard Island and Mcdonald IslandsHoly See (Vatican City State)HondurasHong KongHungaryIcelandIndiaIndonesiaIran, Islamic Republic ofIraqIrelandIsle of ManIsraelItalyJamaicaJapanJerseyJordanKazakhstanKenyaKiribatiKorea, Democratic People’s Republic ofKorea, Republic ofKuwaitKyrgyzstanLao People’s Democratic RepublicLatviaLebanonLesothoLiberiaLibyan Arab JamahiriyaLiechtensteinLithuaniaLuxembourgMacaoMacedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic ofMadagascarMalawiMalaysiaMaldivesMaliMaltaMartiniqueMauritaniaMauritiusMayotteMexicoMoldova, Republic ofMonacoMongoliaMontenegroMontserratMoroccoMozambiqueMyanmarNamibiaNauruNepalNetherlandsNew CaledoniaNew ZealandNicaraguaNigerNigeriaNiueNorfolk IslandNorwayOmanPakistanPalestinianPanamaPapua New GuineaParaguayPeruPhilippinesPitcairnPolandPortugalQatarReunionRomaniaRussian FederationRWANDASaint Barthélemy Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da CunhaSaint Kitts and NevisSaint LuciaSaint Martin (French part)Saint Pierre and MiquelonSaint Vincent and the GrenadinesSamoaSan MarinoSao Tome and PrincipeSaudi ArabiaSenegalSerbiaSeychellesSierra LeoneSingaporeSint Maarten (Dutch part)SlovakiaSloveniaSolomon IslandsSomaliaSouth AfricaSouth Georgia and the South Sandwich IslandsSouth SudanSpainSri LankaSudanSurinameSvalbard and Jan MayenSwazilandSwedenSwitzerlandSyrian Arab RepublicTaiwanTajikistanTanzania, United Republic ofThailandTimor-LesteTogoTokelauTongaTrinidad and TobagoTunisiaTurkeyTurkmenistanTurks and Caicos IslandsTuvaluUgandaUkraineUnited Arab EmiratesUnited KingdomUnited StatesUruguayUzbekistanVanuatuVenezuela, Bolivarian Republic ofVietnamVirgin Islands, BritishWallis and FutunaWestern SaharaYemenZambiaZimbabweI also wish to receive emails from AAAS/Science and Science advertisers, including information on products, services and special offers which may include but are not limited to news, careers information & upcoming events.Required fields are included by an asterisk(*)center_img Natacha Pisarenko/AP Photo Almost 11,000 self-identified members of the scientific community have signed their names to a pro-Fernández statement of support created by Science and Technology Argentina (CyTA), an advocacy group formed in 2016 to oppose Macri’s policies pertaining to science and research.“Four years of cuts combined with a very, very aggressive discourse against scientific work—especially against the social sciences—would be stopped with the government change,” says Rolando González-José, a biologist at the National Patagonian Center in Puerto Madryn and a member of CyTA.But although Fernández and Kirchner have voiced strong support for “the development of knowledge” and increased funding for research, the ticket is not without its problems. Kirchner faces corruption charges, including accusations that she solicited bribes and manipulated financial data during her time in office. And voters are split on which leader—Macri or Kirchner—deserves more blame for Argentina’s current economic crisis, which has sent the value of the peso plunging and inflation soaring.Argentine biologist Marina Simian was so desperate under Macri’s cuts that she famously turned to a local version of the game show Who Wants to be a Millionaire to buy reagents for her lab’s cancer research at the National University of San Martin. Still, she plans to vote for Macri because she worries that a Fernández-Kirchner victory would mean a more authoritarian and less transparent government. And although Simian has criticized Macri’s view of science, she says scientists were protesting low salaries and a dearth of grants long before Macri took office.“We didn’t go from heaven to hell in 4 years,” she says. “We were in hell, and then we fell into a worse hell.”Mario Pecheny, a political science researcher at the University of Buenos Aires and vice president of scientific affairs at CONICET, expects Fernández will be hard-pressed to deliver on his promises, given the country’s economic woes. But he thinks a Fernández victory will be a positive step for research.“I’m not completely sure that the new government will do whatever we want them to,” he says. “But I think it will be much more friendly to science.”last_img read more

Sachin Tendulkar was disappointed with Kapil Dev as coach

first_img(From left) Kapil Dev, Mohammed Azharuddin and Sachin Tendulkar celebrate after beating West Indies in the Cricket Association of Bengal’s Diamond Jubilee six nation tournament in Calcutta on November 27, 1993. Photo: ReutersOne of the finest Indian allrounders of all time, Kapil Dev was a “disappointment” when it came to coaching, reveals batting maestro Sachin Tendulkar in his just-released autobiography Playing It My Way, a PTI report stated.Tendulkar has claimed that he was left disappointed by Kapil during one of the Australia tours since the coach never involved himself in strategic discussions.In the chapter Tumultuous Times: India in Australia, November 1999-January 2000 Tendulkar has written that he had high expectations from Kapil.”During my second stint as captain, we had Kapil Dev as our coach. He is one of the finest cricketers to have played for India and one of the best allrounders of all time, and I had great expectations of him in Australia.”I have always maintained that the coach’s job is an important one, for he is in a position to play a key role in formulating team strategy. Who better than Kapil to come up with options for me during a tough tour of Australia?”However, his method of involvement and his thought process was limited to leaving the running of the team to the captain, and hence he did not involve himself in strategic discussions that would help us on the field,” Tendulkar writes.The Indian batting great also shared his frustration on how some of his moves as captain did not pay off but the same strategy clicked when other captains employed it.advertisementTendulkar talked about the 1997 Sharjah series where he promoted Robin Singh to bat at number three but the southpaw failed and he had to cop heavy criticism from the media.”The match against Pakistan on December 14 highlights how things were just not going my way. I was batting at number four in this competition, at the selectors’ request. Sourav and Navjot Sidhu had given us a good start against Pakistan, and when Sidhu got out at 143 for 2, I sent in Robin Singh, the all-rounder, to accelerate the innings. It was a strategy I had given considerable thought to. .”Manzoor Akhtar, the leg-spinner, was at one end bowling around the wicket to the right-handed batsmen. The theory was that Robin, a left-hander, would be able to negotiate his leg-spin better and also hit some big shots. However, Robin got out without scoring after just three balls from Azhar Mahmood, the medium-pacer, and the experiment proved a disaster. In the press I was criticised for sending in Robin ahead of me and the move was blamed for our defeat,” Tendulkar recalled.”A month later, however, in January 1998, Azhar, back as captain, repeated the very same move in the final of the Silver Jubilee Independence Cup in Dhaka against Pakistan.”Robin was sent in at three to keep up the momentum after Sourav and I had got off to a flier and this time Robin played a terrific hand, scoring 82 and setting up the run chase.”This was arguably a bigger gamble, because he was pitted against the off-spinner Saqlain Mushtaq and it is no secret that left-handers find it more difficult against off-spinners.”The same experiment was now hailed as a master stroke.Not without reason is it said that success has many fathers while defeat is an orphan,” he wrote.last_img read more