Slices & Articles Get by the slice or add to your own ebook
|Clara Erskine Clement||Parkstone International|
|Jesse Liberty||O'Reilly Media||ePub|
When .NET first came to life, there were two ways to create applications: ASP.NET for web applications, and Windows Forms for Windows applications. Although WPF offers many advantages over Windows Forms, Microsoft realizes that there are a great many Windows Forms applications already up, tested, and working, and that many companies will choose to maintain and extend them.
Our interest in this book is how we can use C# to interact with Windows Forms, and in this chapter we'll look at building a nontrivial application using this technology. Figure19-1 shows the application we're going to build. It is a Windows application for copying files from one or more directories to a target directory, written in Windows Forms and designed to be run on a Windows computer (this application has been tested on Windows XP, 2000, and Vista).
Figure19-1.The File Copier application
Once again, because this is a C# book and not a Windows programming book, we're going to make fast work of the UI and focus on the code-behind file and the event handlersthat is, on the C#. Unlike with WPF, however, there is no declarative aspect to Windows Forms; you create the UI by dragging objects onto a form, and then interacting with those objects by clicking on them and setting their properties, either in the Properties window at design time, or programmatically at runtime.See more
|Trevor Payne||Chartridge Books Oxford||ePub|
Facilities Performance and Service Quality
This chapter will look at the benefits of performance monitoring and tools such as benchmarking. The value of space within the organisation will be discussed along with the methodology for conducting a space audit in order to assess if the space that an organisation occupies is efficiently utilised or if there is unlocked potential to ‘reshuffle the deck’ and use space in a different manner by adopting different work processes and patterns. The latter part of this chapter will concentrate on service quality and how to identify the gaps that may exist between customer perception and expectation.
Facilities services are fairly fluid and because of this a process of constant realignment and performance monitoring is required along with customer feedback to ensure that the service provision mirrors the service requirement. Intangibles are dominant in ‘pure service delivery’ and tangibles are dominant in ‘pure goods’. Goods or tangibles are by and large purchased remote from the provider, often in a retail setting or an environment away from the production area. The intangible nature of services (see Chapter 2), on the other hand, means that the majority of service encounters are conducted ‘in the factory’ with the provider and the purchaser face to face, that is the service is simultaneously produced and consumed during the ‘moment of truth’. This presents a unique set of problems with respect to the monitoring and managing of such ‘moments of truth’. The vast majority of service encounters are based upon performance which is largely dependent on the interpersonal skills and training of the service provider at the point of contact. Effective training and empowerment of front-line staff is therefore essential if they are to produce a steady state or constant level of service and feel confident enough to make what they consider to be the right decision when they are required to do so. The concept of the ‘servicescape’ will reinforce the links between physical and environmental influences and their effect on the outcome of the overall service provision. This concept links intangible elements with tangibles, enabling the service to be developed to take into account the effect of these external influencing factors, or to be tailored to suit a particular environment – to present a feel of the ‘total facilities experience’ (service wrapping).See more
|Dick Axelrod||Berrett-Koehler Publishers||ePub|
We meet because people holding different jobs have to cooperate to get a specific task done. We meet because the knowledge and experience needed in a specific situation are not available in one head, but have to be pieced together out of the knowledge and experience of several people.
You’ve already seen us refer to the Meeting Canoe as a system. This is a great time for us to tell you why we use that language.
The Meeting Canoe (Axelrod et al. 2004) is a complete rethinking of the meeting design, execution, and follow-up; it frames meetings as the factory floor for knowledge workers. Can you imagine getting substantial work done during meetings? It can and does happen in organizations that use the Meeting Canoe. Let’s unpack that “system” claim. The Meeting Canoe is a system because
• The Meeting Canoe’s parts influence each other. How connected people feel directly impacts how they understand the way things are, their ability to dream about the future, and the decisions they make.See more
|Chris Wallace-Crabbe||Carcanet Press Ltd.|
Business & Economics