关于目前国内股市的思考

关于目前国内股市的思考

2007-1-29 梁山石燕于TORONTO

国内股市热啊,一个个争先恐后杀入, 形势一片大好, 似乎人人都在赚钱,人人都发财!有道是”这钱不赚白不赚吗”

股市的钱真有那么好赚吗 ？

是的, 股市是这世上少数几个穷人发家致富的捷径之一.财富在一两年间在股市里翻一倍到十倍不是什么希奇的事.可是财富在一年内在股市里缩水一倍到百倍也同样不是希奇的事!

今天看到一个新闻,英国《金融时报》1月24日发表文章，题目是“测试中国股市风向”。文章说，任何一个人都可以玩下面这个游戏。首先调出一份14个月前至今的中国深圳股市 综合指数走势图，然后在另一个屏幕上调出截至2000年3月10日的14个月内纳斯达克综合指数走势图。接下来，请周围的人尽量找出两张图表的不同之处。 (注：在2000年3月10日，美国股市的科技股股价到达顶峰，随后开始雪崩。)两个指数走势图几乎一模一样：不到一年涨幅超过100%；最后几个月近乎 直线上升。。。。。。结论是---上述对比让人有理由担心：中国股市要转向了。

我不是专家,不敢轻易下结论,股市已经到顶了,大家赶快逃吧. 实际上,就我自己的判断也是这是中国股市十年来最大的一波行情! 因为有种种迹象表明,新资金不断入市,股市里集聚的资金也越来越多,而资金是会推高股市的.真的是这样吗 我所知道的是人心的疯狂程度无法预料!但最终都有醒悟的那一天!关于这一点,最有名的就是牛顿在”南海事件”后的名言“我能计算出天体的运行轨迹，但无法计算人类的疯狂。” 密西西比泡沫于1719年12月2日见顶，随后的崩盘引发大量资金回流英国，寻找下一个操作目标, 英国南海公司! 1720年4月20日，经典物理学的奠基人牛顿将他持有的南海公司股票卖出，获得了约7000英镑的100%高额利润，不幸的是，当时的投机冲动同样也感染了他，他在市场达到最高点时买入了大量的股票，最后损失了 20000英镑。事后，牛顿总结说：“我能计算出天体的运行轨迹，但无法计算人类的疯狂。”因这次投机而闻名的还有另外一个人,就是当时的英国国王,国王因投资10万英镑被套,所以史称”套住英国国王的南海事件”.我不知道牛顿那时有多少钱,但可以肯定的是牛顿再买入时一定跟你我一样有着股票再翻番的美梦!只是据说牛顿梦醒时分,损失惨重啊!

我不反对炒股,但我坚决反对黑炒,啥也不懂,啥也不学,在财富效应的带动下,不给自己加任何保护就把自己的血汗钱投入股市,那不叫投机,那叫疯狂!

是的, 炒股是投机,不是投资,如果去掉那层遮羞布的话!你要坚持说那是投资的话,那么,请问股东大会你参加过没有这是你作为股东当履行的权利和义务!可曾为该公司的发展操心配股和增发你都积极参与了没有可曾长期主动持有?

投机的确是有利可图的,也可以作为一种职业.但是,江恩在华尔街四十五年中总结得再清楚不过”种瓜得瓜,种斗得豆.为知识花费时间和金钱,并不断学习,永不以为自己无所不知而是意识到学无止境的人,是会在投机或投资中获得成功的人!”江恩是何许人也 江恩是图表分析的开创者,是历史上该领域中最杰出的大师,他可是可以计算出股票顶点和底点的牛人啊!在我眼里,上世纪诞生的顶尖股票大师实际上只有三位,他们分别代表了三个极端的例子.分别是 杰西•利文摩尔(Jesse Livermore),威廉•江恩（William Delbert Gann), 以及大家熟悉的股神巴菲特.（索罗斯算不上） 下面分别简述以帮助形成概念.

杰西就是<<股票作手回忆录>>的原型,有一个绰号”华尔街金童”,也被称为”投机小子”. 杰西1877年生于美国,14岁时得到一个在股票经纪行给行情板上抄写报价的工作,每周挣一美圆.是的,他初中毕业!在抄写报价的过程中,他能看出某些股票价格变动的趋向,但没想过要买股票,直到有一天一个大男孩找他合伙买股票,他的一生都被改变了.19世纪末和20世纪初的股票市场是一个充满了骗子和赌徒的市场,经纪公司对阿拉斯加铁路公司股票的推介是这样描述阿拉斯加的那里有着热带雨林的美好气候,到处是猴子和水果!!!但由于杰西天才的思想和直觉,他总能及时嗅出那些花招和把戏而及时脱身,顺便捎走大把的钞票.以至于他被每一家做买空卖空投机生意的商号拒之门外,即便这样,依然常被他透过代理人逮住机会大赚一票.很多时候,虽然只是瞬间一眼,他也能迅速发现机会做多做空,这方面例子很多,不讲了.

杰西人生的顶峰就是在1929年的股灾中处处占得先机,做多做空再做多再反手做空,积累的财富达到上亿美圆.可是,要知道,这之前他曾好几次破产,靠借债东山再起.1929年的股灾是股票历史上的最大灾难,多家公司的股票成了废纸,很多人破产自杀!但是到1931年,他财产的半数不见了.1934年3月4日, 杰西不得不申请破产,欠债226万,口袋里只有18.4美圆.之后,他再次借债图谋东山再起, 江恩向他伸出了援手.杰西的人品是诚实和正直的,他的还款记录和能力一惯良好.但这次,他卷土重来并赚了钱后就没能再起来.1940年11月28日, 一 个大雪纷飞的日子，房东又来找杰西逼讨房租。他喝下仅剩的半瓶威士忌，从寓所溜了出来。他在大街上转悠着，望着大街上往来穿梭的豪华汽车，望着商店橱窗里 琳琅满目的商品，望着街边伸手乞讨的乞丐，他长叹一口气说：“他妈的！这世界是个弱肉强食的世界，它永远只属于富人。”杰西走进一家大旅馆的卫生间，从口袋里掏出手枪，朝自己的脑袋扣动了扳机。他留下的遗书写道：“我的一生是一场失败。”也有这样评价他的,Jesse Livermore作为美国历史是最伟大的投机人，他以个人的力量，曾经使华尔街战栗，胆寒！他的投机理念，和操盘术，一直是全世界投机客追捧和模仿的最爱。我们应该学习他的成功方法。至于他的破产，自杀，有许多家庭的悲剧因素使然(养了很多女人)。即使破产后，也不象有些人想当然的“穷困潦倒”，无法生存。Livermore在事业上曾经的巨大成功，和他的悲惨结局，都是一个历史人物的自然。伟人的悲剧，也许对后人具有更多的警示和借鉴。

杰西可以说是投机客的最高境界,他的买卖点常常是最高最低点,先是猎杀庄家,后来自己也做庄家.但是,市场永远是对的,他数次爆仓,数次破产,到死他也不知道哪里错了.他认为1929年后证券交易委员会修改了交易规则对他不利. 但江恩认为他太贪心,有权力欲,大赚一票后就不能稳妥地交易.他除了学习如何赚钱外什么都不学.他从不学保住钱的方法.他要支配一切,没有料到天有不测风云,意外总是出现,因此结果是他输了钱. 日本股神邱永汉也曾数次破产,每次东山再起靠的是以前买的一块地,杰西也曾投资地产,结果每次依然都被洗得一干二净. 另外有网友认为杰西失败的原因是他的性格缺陷,一个试图打败市场的性格缺陷,一个少年得志,被大家公认是高手而自己也认为是高手的直接结果.据说国内外做期货大败的人,个个如此!

看了杰西的故事, 不要以为他离我们很遥远.无论海内外,杰西的投机理念和操盘术现在依然被投机客们顶礼膜拜,个个神交向往不已,可谓阴魂不散.在中国,你要理解庄家的思路,那就最好向他们的祖师爷学起.不要被他悲惨的结局吓倒了,你要学的是如何挣钱,不是如何花钱.而且既然你选择做股民的话,有人赚有人亏是免不了的,你要做的是如何比别人更高明.在他的自传里相当多的老手最后都保住了利润.急流勇退也是英明啊! 后面就讲到提外话,一个华尔街的无名小子,通过分析对比1989年的市场状况和1929年的市场热度,准确预见了1989年的股灾而大量放空, 股灾后拿走1千多万美元隐居了(他的合约翻了800倍).是啊,挣够你想要的钱,再多挣一块钱也是多余的.炒股是很辛苦的事! 要知道杰西工作一直很努力.从14岁起就一直记投资笔记,不是一般的笔记,而是每日的股价波动.现在当然不用手工了,电脑很好用啊,但不表示你可以不花工夫就发大财. 现在看见散户在股票厅里看行情板就觉得可怜,当初抄写黑板的小弟那么多,只有杰西成了才,而当今散户只看行情板而不会电脑分析就能发财,神了

下面该讲股票分析大师威廉•江恩（William DelbertGann).

在了解他以前,先看看一段新闻1909年，10月美国“The Ticketr and Investment Digest”杂志编辑Richard .Wyckoff的一次实地访问。在杂志人员的监察下，江恩在十月份的二十五个市场交易日中共进行286次买卖，结果，264获利，22次损失，获利率竟达92.3%(这是股票史上交易者的最高记录)。江恩所运用的买卖资金，一个月内增长共1000%((这也是股票史上交易者的最高记录)。在某个交易日中，他进行了十六次买卖，其中八次是当天波动的即市顶部或底部。据江恩一位朋友基利(William Gilley)的回述：“1909年夏季，江恩预测9月小麦期权将会见1.20美元。可是，到9月30日芝加哥时间十二时，该期权仍然在1.08美元之下徘徊，江恩的预测看似落空。江恩说：‘如果今日收市时不见1.20美元，将表示我整套分析方法都有错误。不管现在造什么价，小麦一定要见1.20美元。’结果，在收市前一小时，小麦冲上1.20美元；震动整个市场。该合约不偏不倚，正正在1.20美元收市。”

威廉•江恩1878年6月6日出生在美国德克萨斯州的一个农场,父母是爱尔兰裔移民，在浓厚的基督教循道会的背景下长大。江恩是极为虔诚的基督教徒，熟读圣经，他宣称，在圣经之中，发现了市场循环理论。1902年，江恩在24岁时，第一次入市买卖棉花期货。在其五十三年的投资生涯中，江恩共从市场上赚得5000万美元。与杰西不同,江恩的投资生涯中没有破产负债记录,名利双收! 在纽约,江恩亦主持走势分析方法讲座，收费惊人。在一个名为《掌握预测方法》讲座中，江恩向每位参加者收取二千五百美元。而另一个名为《新机械式买卖方法及趋势指标》讲座，收费更高达五千美元。来听课的多是那些”高素质”的“专业”的银行家和基金经理,而江恩什么学历 语法学校(初中)未毕业，也未上过高中,后来参加过商业夜校,仅此而已! 1924年，W.D.Gann的第一本书------Turth of the Stock Tape出版了。它是图表分析的开创，至今仍被视为该领域中最杰出的作品。在1930年，他写了《华尔街股票选择》，1936年，他写了《股票趋势测市法》, 1949年，他出版了《在华尔街的45年》. 1955年6月他离开了人世，享年77岁。网上是这么评价他的:

我们将在这个卓越的人的一生中获得些什么经验教训呢？

首先，这是美国人梦想的断言。得克萨斯州Lufkin的William Delbert Gann开始时一无所有。他和他家人都没有钱，没受过教育，没有前途。但是在不到40年的时间里，在无意中听到交易者们在铁路汽车上的谈话后(少年江恩在火车上卖报纸等小买卖)，W.D.Gann被世界所知晓。

第二，是努力工作所带来的结果。W.D.Gann很早起床，工作至很晚，以旺盛的精力处理他的生意(少年时在农场的艰苦劳动习惯,他是长子)。实际上，他所有的教育都来自自我管理。作为一教师，作家和先知的预言家，他只受过三年级的正式教育，但他从未停止过阅读。

第三，自由的思考可能带来了其价值。W.D.Gann在智力上的好奇导致了非凡的学位。他不害怕异端的理念，无论在金融还是在生活中的其他领域都是一样的。他不总保证正确，我们没有人能总是正确，但他敢于追求更好的想法。

第四，一定有某种事物净化活跃的生意。作为一个保守的浸教会教友，W.D.Gann不抽烟，不喝酒，不玩牌，也不跳舞。他在态度举止上非常严肃，是一个保守的穿衣者，尽管他最后几年里在某种程度上有所作为。他珍惜一美元的价值，并且在他的个人消费上十分谨慎。并不是每一个受到国际欢迎的预言者都能继续在布鲁克林一个简朴的房子里生活的。

第五，信仰帮助了他。W.D.Gann一生学习《圣经》。这是他的书中书。他最后一本书《神奇的学习》在1950年出版，强烈地反映出他的这种对信仰的虔诚。

最后，是唯一一个我想冒险提供给交易者的教训。W.D.Gann从未停止研究市场，甚至在他的预言开始后，在他取得了国际成望后。但他相信循环，他也知道市场总是在变化，决事必须以今天的情况作为基础，而不是昨天的。

如果说本间宗久200年前推出的K线分析(酒田战法)是技术分析的开端的话,威廉•江恩的图表分析就是技术分析的鼻祖.这二者奠定了当今股票,汇市,期市分析的基础.实际上,当你打开电脑或报纸,看到的股票图形就包含了这二者的主要内容. K线分析适用于研判短期,而威廉•江恩的图表分析短期长期均可,长期更有威力.比起当今中国的所谓的分析大师们使用的又是导数,又是三重积分的花花样,江恩使用最多的就是直尺和铅笔,有时候用角度尺和圆规! 江恩成名的时候, 导数和三重积分早发明了,最后还是江恩的简单方法有效. 江恩写《华尔街45年》的时候已经72岁了,名利对他已经不重要了.写书的目的就是要给投资者珍贵的礼物-知识和投资方法.那24条永恒的规则是他一生经验的总结.里面没有一句废话,我不想多说什么,投资者自己去看,人家那每句话都是有依据的,血泪史啊! 应当指明的是, 《华尔街45年》通篇朴实无华,很直白的语气把意思表达得清清楚楚.这不是初中生能写的文章,江恩的确是一生学习的好榜样! 另外还有道氏理论和波浪理论，也是业界公认的西方技术分析的经典.

最后再说股神巴菲特.他大家都知道,我只说我的观察和思考.巴菲特是股票历史上聚敛财富最多的人,而且有一个很鲜明特征就是他钱挣得最轻松,也最慢,同时又是最多的! 杰西当年顶峰雇佣了约60人帮他照看电话、电报以及股票行情自动收录器,还不算雇佣的间谍. 江恩的事业高峰期，他共聘用二十五人，为他制作各种分析图表及进行各类市场走势研究，并成立两间走势研究公司.而巴菲特仅雇佣了10个人,办公室没有一台行情报价器,电脑也不是用来显示行情的,却每周净赚一亿!比起杰西写数据日记和江恩手工绘图的辛苦, 巴菲特只看看财务报告和打打电话就幸运和幸福得多了,我认为这是安全空间理论的最大胜利! 目前市面上关于他的书很多,但是有些是外行写的垃圾,找懂行的写手,就能慢慢琢磨出问题. 安全空间理论的创始人就是巴菲特的老师格雷厄姆(Benjamin Graham 著有Intelligent Investors,是证券定量分析的鼻祖). 格雷厄姆发财了吗?发了,但比起他的学生是小巫见大巫(2000万美圆).格雷厄姆大师在1929年的股灾中损失惨重啊!!!可能正因为此才诞生了安全空间理论. 安全空间理论的核心用通俗的话讲就是寻找那些跌破净资产值的股票并持有,等到股价回到净资产值再抛出获利.这里问题很多:

.A。净资产的计算严重依赖于财务报表的真实性!!!应该说是前提!我相信财务报表大多数都是真实的,但银广厦和安然事件离我们都不远吧?

B. 跌破净资产的股票大多不被市场看好,也就是那些业绩题材都很一般的冷门股居多,比如家具店,印刷厂什么的,没什么高科技含量,甚至有些就是亏损股,呵呵! 巴菲特自己也这样形容捡别人扔掉的烟屁股,在熄灭之前狠狠地吸上一口.所以难怪网上有人说他是捡垃圾股发财!

C. 安全空间得多大才是安全介入的时间,一倍2倍三倍股票跌起来可没谱,太早了股价也会往下掉,不信你们自己计算2006年1月中国股市任一股票的安全空间看看.( 简单计算:每股收益+每股净资产+每股资本公积金+每股未分配利润-股价) 巴菲特当年买通用动力时也是越买越跌,最后过了很久股价才上来.呵呵!

D. 当股价回归股票净值时,安全空间为零,是否应当立即卖出这时已经是获利的!不卖的话又违背了安全空间的原则,两难啊!

E.当股市低迷时,大量股票的安全边际远超过1,那我选哪个呢?总不能每支买上一点吧?

F.格雷厄姆是大学教授,教出的学生可不止巴菲特一人, 虽然有很多巴菲特的追随者也发了财,但在这行有名望的目前能看到的却只有巴菲特一人,为什么?目前老巴和他的搭档理查都已经70多岁了,贝壳公司的管理者却后继无人,为什么?

G. 巴菲特做为代表人物,但他的传记里充满了问题.比如

G1从1956年在家乡募集10万美圆开始其投资生涯, 巴菲特在里面投入了仅100美圆,其贝壳公司的26年的年均回报率是23.5%,按25%的复利计算到1996年,不吃不喝100元也只能是75万2316元,但实际上1994年他已经是第二富毫了.他怎么发的财.另有论述.

G2巴菲特买进可口可乐时该股已比6年前涨了5倍,高估了吧但他买进后依然三年翻了4倍,而且将长期持有,内在价值怎么确?

G3. 巴菲特不买网络股,因为他看不懂,但网络股行情那可是真今白银实实在在的事,GOOGLE 的神话不还在正上演着吗网上有个小子说用安全空间理论计算出GOOGLE的内在价值是370元每股,那么人家奥尼尔买进GOOGLE时可是1块钱一股啊这又怎么解释

不说了,免得你们看着累!总之,炒股的事没那么简单.

炒股的军规

1、保本,2、止损,3、不预测,4、不盲从,5、不熟不做,6、迅速决断….

我却觉得第1条是不要向他人推荐股票!不预测大市，不为他人把脉个股，想想1929股灾时的证券分析鼻祖——本杰明.格雷厄姆的痛苦！知不知道,当年格林斯盘在做美联储主席前开公司给人荐股票,结果给人家亏了几百万,公司只有关门了事.我不知道你们对股票的认识有多深,经验有多丰富.这一条却是大师们的铁律. 这也是股者的基本要求.认识到这一条的人一定都经历过血泪的代价.我开始以为不要向人荐股是因为每个股者都不同,荐股后不同的人实施起来买进和卖出的时机决不会相同.后来发现更重要的原因是股票的走势连巴菲特这样的股神也预测不了.江恩可以计算出股票的高点和低点,但概率也很低.无论盈亏多少,正确的概率也只有92.3%.这已经是人类史上的最高记录了,但江恩那下的工夫多大呀,10年泡在图书馆里研究过去的股票走势,一直辛苦工作到老.这样说你就明白了,国内的股评人士自己知道自己也没把握,自己也知道自己是骗子,评论发出去能害死人,但他们是吃这碗饭的啊谁养他们呢散户,开玩笑!!!真能发财也不会狂写文章挣稿费了,那才几个钱.我再给你两个先辈的研究结果:A.股票十次有六次正确就能让人发财,不输就赢还50%呢! B, 《华尔街操盘高手》里记录了两个大鳄鱼的赌:任何人经过培训都可以炒股发财,的确是这样,但前提是只有10%的人适合干这个,不管他以前是干什么的.一些操盘公司对新人的培训也证明了这个,只有10%经过培训后能留下来,这些人可是在用别人的钱在炒股赚钱. 中国股市的特征”十个里面一个赚2个平7个亏”这个中国股民自己的总结特征你们总该知道吧.那么这个10%的自然规律那些股市专家知道吗,一定知道,在很多股票书籍里对这点都有论述,那么他们为何还高调宣扬中国股市形式一片大好,荐来荐去吸引新股民入市,居心何在这个问题,我想通了以后自己也很难过了一阵子,但是没有办法的事.你们知道藏獒是怎么培养的吗 藏獒本来就是普通的藏狗下的崽,而且他有兄弟姐妹,可是最终却”十狗一獒”,另外九只狗哪去了答案是被要成为獒的那只狗给吃掉了,因为主人故意把他们放在一个石窝里而又不给食物让他们自相残杀.最后剩下的那只凶残的狗可以培养成藏獒.很残酷啊,但没有办法,毕竟这是国家内部的财富流动.如果开放外汇管制,国外的股市热时我们中国的股民蜂拥而出被套在国外,那对国家的损失就大了,毕竟我们还在吸引外来投资.(我对国内股评的态度是10份看三份,这三分还要反过来看,可信的大概不到一份吧.)

2.运用止损来保本.

我不是没有买错过,但买进没涨或者跌了我都立即扔了.因为我买进就是图它涨,我要的是股票的主升段,它没涨我还要它干啥手续费多便宜,微亏的时候我还有本还可以保,割肉先!下次看准了我还有筹码可以玩啊!一个主升段就把损失全补回来还能赚一票!国外交易是可以设定限价单,国内还没有这样的交易功能,那就得订着看了.我开始也不明白为何那么多人被套到国外聚会偶然听朋友说起我是朋友圈里认错最快的人,才明白被套跟个人特质有关,得罪各位了,在这个方面不讨论了.我觉得还跟各为忙于自己的本职工作没时间看股票有关.我特意下载了2000年NASDAQ的顶点数据来分析过,还原成图形后可以明显看出,当时逃跑是一定有机会的,顶部的先兆也很明显,山雨欲来风满楼啊.甚至第一次暴跌还很快就出现了一次反弹.可散户们就是不愿逃顶,还等着更上一层楼啦!!!个股分析比如北电也有这样的特征,从120跌到0.6可不是一天就到底的,用了2年多的时间,虽然是阴跌,但中间一直有机会,可很多散户就是不愿跑,不懂行啊.不懂为啥还要去做,我也不懂啊!

3.股票分析和选股

我在国内国外都没有找到可交流的股友,常去海外最大的中文网站的股坛潜水,学了不少东西,积累了一些资料.前几天一帮人在争论基本面分析(FA)和技术分析(TA)哪个重要,让人怎么说呢?我先说我的思考:基本面分析和技术分析就相当于人的2条腿,财务分析和市场分析就相当与人的左右手,你的资金就相当于你的躯干,加上你的头就是一个完整的股民!加上电脑和网络以及行情分析交易软件就相当与手里多了把刀!没有刀也能杀人,带刀的更像个武士! 基本面分析大致包括经济分析,行业分析和国家政策分析,变化较少;技术分析那就是日常的重点了,主要是个股,比如各样的技术指标和图表,多数人会沉沦在这一块,变化多端,很难灵活掌握,威力也大;财务分析就是看财务报表了,这是公开的资料,变化也少,能看出门道来那就是工夫.还有就是市场分析,这个最直观了,市场热烈和冷清,热门股,热门版块,一目了然,但能决定你何时要扬刀出鞘,何时战斗结束!下面分述之

基本面分析这个应该都知道,股市是经济的晴雨表,可是,从2001年6月到2005年7月,上证跌了整整一半,而中国经济依旧高速增长,国家不是不想让它涨,圈钱的好事谁想放弃连哄带骗好不容易才又恢复过来,中国的股市有”政策市”这一说.但股市有它自身的规律,涨起来没谱,跌起来没底.至于救市这一说,美国救过,中国也救过,真的那么管用吗.1929年的股灾给美国带来经济灾难”大萧条”,美国产能直接下降一半,工人四分之一失业,破产自杀随处可见,迫使美国在那之后建立了社会保障体系(30年代).美国政府的救市那可实惠多了,扶助接管破产企业,屡约那些因破产无法交割的和约,前面提到的那个小子在1989年股灾中的放空和约在翻600倍的时候别人劝他去履约,他觉得还会再跌,等到翻800倍的时候,卖和约给他的那家经纪早破产消失了,谁来买单最后美国证券交易委员会给他付了钱!真让人感动啊,想想中国,答案可能会是这把不算,重新再来! 再后来网络泡沫,跟美国政府好象没关系.一个稳定的经济,开明的政策,朝阳的产业,良好的社会风气和环境,就是一个好的基本面.

技术分析前面论述很多了.当年我曾把那些个MACD,KDJ,RSI,OBV主要的技术指标细细琢磨过一便,发现最大特征就是在大牛市和大熊市中,这些指标全都没用,图表分析反而可以在此排大用场.但在盘整区间,则指标意义比较明显.但还是不如均线系统加趋势线来得简单有效.最明显而管用的一招就是在牛股的盘整区的底部买入(第三个低点),买入后若它跌破底线,立即扔掉,损失不回超过5%,若到上轨又转头向下就再扔掉,可小赚;但它若向上击穿上轨,再立即加码买进,当然也可以等到此时才介入,随后的就是一波大行情(主升段).不要问我准确率有多高,我只能说经验证明很高,当年我就是这么眼睁睁地看着亿安科技破位创新高时的17块一直到60,再到80,最后到125,走过的路就是这样.我跟了吗我没跟!半年后的河南思达也走过了同样的路,从16块走到56块!懂行的人说可以做骗线,但骗线会跌下来,大不了立即再扔掉,没什么损失.这招在国外也用过,在北电的反弹行情中,当时的整理形态是收敛三角形,我在三角形的收口处买入,不久就涨50%,在上涨乏力时再扔掉,创新高时再买入,又涨了50%,这次上涨乏力时没扔掉,贪心啊!不久就狂跌,在大跌时扔的动作慢了一点,利润缩水不少! 这就是技术分析的魅力,几乎可以独立于基本分析和财务分析,市场分析在这里也显得不重要.”与庄共舞”靠的就是技术分析和胆量!

财务分析.前面在对巴菲特的论述里已经讲了不少,( 每股收益+每股净资产+每股资本公积金+每股未分配利润-股价)大致就是该股的安全空间,仔细看看本次沪深股市行情,我认为这就是最直接的反映本次行情的核心就是价值回归! 2006/1/1前多支股票跌破净资产,现在的大牛股,那些行业领头羊,业绩最好股票其股价也和破净资产值差不多,有的甚至一半都不到,这时侯,基金是重仓的,基金偏好绩优股,但基金也跌得溃不成军,跌一半是肯定的.后来在各种题材的带动下,一个个翻起来没谱,2倍不嫌多,5倍8倍不嫌少!那么那些安全空间最大的,也就是跌得最多的股票涨起来没,没做确切的统计,观察结果我只能说涨得不多.为什么,市场的力量在起作用!这个下面再讲. 前面已经说过,跌破净资产的股票大多不被市场看好,也就是那些业绩题材都很一般的冷门股居多,比如家具店,印刷厂,油漆呀地毯商什么的,没什么高科技含量,甚至有些就是亏损股.这个问题以前可能也困饶过巴菲特,后来我发现巴菲特绕开了这个问题, 巴菲特有俩大重仓股是他的至爱,就是通用动力和吉利,这两的共同特点是行业老大,历史悠久,稳定赢利,而且资产收益率在10%以上,我没有核对过通用和吉利的历年财报,那玩意是要钱的. 巴菲特在60年代曾登广告收购一些小企业,要求就是资产1000万以上, 资产收益率在10%以上.被收购的就有家具店和印刷厂,保险公司等私营小企业,这些经营良好的小企业产生了大量的现金流,给老巴后来对上市公司的收购提供了大量的现金.而且老巴还特别偏好那些高分红的股票,认为这说明管理层的确在为股东的利益考虑,而不是令人恶心的增发圈钱然后再委托理财!简单一点就是,用安全空间理论选股的前提是行业老大, 资产收益率在10%以上.这里又有一个问题,那些行业老大因为被市场追捧而股价居高不下, 巴菲特在计算安全空间时使用了预期收益,这里面的门道不少,不好算.以前深圳有个小子以前说贵州茅台的内在价值是40多元,而当时股价才20多元,所以贵州茅台被低估了应该买云云.但回头怎么算贵州茅台的净资产值才15左右,还没到20.不知道这小子咋算的,记得他是把贵州茅台几年后才卖的存货也给算进去了,他怎么那么清楚那些存货的,说明这小子很用心,平时一定收集了不少资料,也可能到贵州去看过.现在贵州茅台一股110,发大了.还有就是财务分析得有相应的专业财务知识,这个得自学吧.而且有本书<<统计会说谎>>,据说很有助益.说到这,不得不提当年的蓝田股份(生态农业)的大跳水,从公开的财务报表里中央财经大学研究员刘姝威得出了蓝田股份没有盈利能力应停止发放贷款的结论,引发了雪崩式的大跳水.问题在于,一个局外人尚且从财务报表能看出财务问题,那些投资机构的职业经理们怎么就看不出呢在不济到现场去看看也行啊.所以我特不相信国内投资机构的职业经理的职业道德和专业素质,现在也许好点了吧. 巴菲特其实还有一个老师叫费雪(证券定性分析的鼻祖),那在投资之前一定会到上市公司里去看一看的.老巴有需要一个电话就打到上市公司CEO那去了,或者直接做董事.

市场分析.<<股票作手回忆录>>里记录了一个故事一个老鳄鱼得到消息说某股要涨了,令人惊讶的是, 老鳄鱼立即挂出一长放空1万股的单子,片刻间,1万股的单子被消灭得一干二净.老鳄鱼这才挂出一张5万股的买单,杰西奇怪他为何这么干,答案的原文我忘了怎么写,但大意是”我需要测试市场的温度”.后来杰西也学了这招,先挂一张小单投石问路,没有错时再大单杀入.是的,有时候就这样,基本分析,技术分析,财务分析都做好了,钱也准备了,但市场还没反映,也就是行情还没发动,你急啥啊!行情发动了,市场很追捧,你得看是否会过热,高点在哪脱手容易吗 中国的涨跌停板制度保护了散户也害了散户,散户的动作总是慢一步,碰上恶庄,涨停买不到,连拉7个涨停翻一倍再卖给散户,跌起来7个跌停亏一半还卖不掉.套个结实! 洞察先机的本事是要修炼才能出来的, 山雨欲来风满楼,春江水暖鸭先知,行情发动之前在技术分析图上会有蛛丝马迹.自己去琢磨吧.1929年和1989年的股灾总有人能逃掉而且大赚,国内也一样,高手多的是!

4.关于风险和收益

股票其实就是风险和收益的结合体,国人往往只看见了收益,看不到风险,所以人人踊跃杀入! 97年我开始学股票以前,就读到这样的新闻,在96年的那波行情中,自杀的人中有一家三口,上海人,男的听了股票热,拿了公款去炒股,外行介入股市的时机必定是行情的尾声,没多久就亏了,再拿更多的公款来翻本,再亏,再买,亏了20多万吧,抗不住了,有骨气,自觉愧对党国,带着老婆儿子(十岁左右)开煤气自杀了. 在专业投机原理里面对风险和收益有非常详细而精确的论述,会指导你应该每次应该投入多大资金,赚的时候怎么处理,亏的时候怎么处理,很详细,自己找来看. 这里就提到一个策略失误的问题,买股票跌了,应不应该再继续买以摊低成本.我先问,请问狙击手在杀人时放一枪还是两枪?如果你懂行的话就知道, 狙击手若不采用3发速射以对付较远目标时,正常情况下,一枪未中，由副射手补射一枪,两枪都未中,别打了,逃命吧!武林高手一击未中,立即全身而退,忘了吗?股票涨起来100元不嫌高,跌起来1块钱不嫌低,越跌越买,找死.除非你大资金,或者武功实在高强!

好了,大致意思说完了,还有些要重申

1. 不可借钱炒股,更不能把买房子的钱投入股市!卖了房子炒股更是疯子.股票毕竟是人的活动,是种心理活动,违背人理的事不要做,神不祝福! 心理上的压力会导致你判断失误而错误连连,何况高风险!

2.不要开联名帐户炒股!江恩说的,问他去.我所知道的是2003或2004年老巴的贝壳公司年会上,有人准备好了西红柿要扔他,因为听到了老巴购进了中石油的利好消息而作罢.天,能参加老巴的股东大会的都是些什么人啊那贝壳公司可是2万多美圆一股的(现在8万美元一股)!给人打工不容易啊!自娱,哄老婆开心,逗女儿玩都可以,不要犯傻.

3.不要向人炫耀你买了什么股,一方面误导了人给人造成损失,因为市场老在变,另一方面我觉得国内人买股有赶时髦的虚荣心理.我在深圳时有一交情很一般的同事MM突然之间在我面前炫耀说她买了用友软件,好像80左右买的.我什么也说不出来,只是心理替她悲哀.我知道那时用友刚上市,起价就很高,好像60多吧,她买的时候专家们正大力推荐说该股会涨到100,我心里明白她几乎买在最高点,但看着兴高采烈的样子我能说什么,说了有用吗.后来用友冲到了90多就一路跌到12块,我不知道她割了没有,现在40了,时间已经5年了.何必呢,那MM精明能干,但挣钱真的不容易,那一手要8000.二手16000,不知道她一年能攒这么多吗.弄了半天给别人打工.另外据说有人在100块以上买进亿安科技向同事炫耀,有必要吗?一手一万,有钱人啊,那套可真结实! 闷声发大财,这是我在国外学到的真理.

4..基金很热啊,我看了看,一方面是前面说过, 基金重仓的大牛股多,显示基金经理比以前要进步.另一方面市场上有抢购基金的大量新资金,新股民因为知道自己不懂行而又听说基金稳妥适合新股民, 推动了基金的走高.所以现在基民们人人都赚钱,人人都高兴.不过,我得提醒你们,1929年的股灾前也是人人都赚钱,人人都高兴,要不怎么吸引那些街头小贩,卖菜的,檫皮鞋的都跑去炒股发财呢后来股灾爆发的那一刻开始,人人都想卖,可是人人都卖不掉,股票就是这么做废的!股民就是这么破产的.基金的最大坏处就是没有什么大的机构锁仓(利润太低,不如做股票来钱快,人家没兴趣).全是散户组成的一盘散沙,在蜂拥而出的时候互相倾轧,最后以连续跌停收场,但愿我是错的.目前看有几支基金怎么看处于头部形态呢不过据说在股市最狂热的1929年夏，美国封闭基金的价格远远超过其资产净值，比二战后封闭基金平均溢价60%，这意味着资产的价格远远高于资产的价值。

5.专业投机原理提到的一个稳赢的策略是:比如你投2万,现在涨到3万,那么应该卖掉价值2万的股票收回你的成本,留1万的股票继续升值.中国股票才15年历史,以后的路还长,机会多的是,学好安全稳妥地持续赚钱更重要.

6.关于股评中价值投资的谎言不要相信机构买进后就回长期持有的谎言,中信证券本月有四家机构公布了减持.若真好,干吗不自己留着? 中信证券那可真是大牛股啊,一边狂减持一边还能创新高,很像亿安科技啊.还有弛宏锌锗,那可真是第一绩优股啊,49%净资产收益率.留着分红每十股可分好几块十块的啊!可庄家不干,要卖给散户,分红的好事留给散户, 随者” 户均持股 半年内从13000狂降到6186,股票在30多横了半年吧.现在再推到80,不是有股评人说会到100吗,这庄家可以全身而退了,留下散户高位接盘来喝汤!不知道没有机构大户支持的弛宏锌锗在100能站多久? 中信证券配售给机构的价格可是在10元以下的,.现在40了吧不知道哪只新股会被这些机构选中再演绎下一个中信证券和弛宏锌锗.

7.关于奥运,没想到国内提前消费把这跟股市联系起来,我看过高科技行情,又见过网络行情,结果呢股市总是需要新题材炒作一番拿去骗人,仔细看看上市司的经营范围,有哪家是跟奥运相关联的好像奥运跟人人都沾边,又好像跟人人都不沾边,该种地的种地, 有哪家是因为奥运而业绩成倍增长, 修建几坐体育馆要用几百万吨钢吗那怎么钢铁股猛长,难道每个游客都要带走2吨钢材吗这奥运不是还没开始吗 提前消费中国股民都是神仙, 想让股市长,这股市就猛涨! 当年二战爆发股市也没这么疯涨,人家那企业可都是大发战争财的! 企业赢利不靠题材,得靠业绩! 有点业绩,再加题材就能让股市疯起来.不知道哪家的疯丫头没挨过揍 庄托,这个新名词,在中国能揪出一大片! 1926年，美国佛罗里达房地产热中,地产商能把海底的地皮也卖出去,见证人就是今天麦当劳的创始人克拉克,当时他就是一中介人.也不知道当时人咋会那样狂热?

8. 中国现在外汇储备有1万忆美圆.而今后的国际经济战争无法避免,国际游资每天都有1.5万亿美圆在寻找投机机会.上世纪80年代的日元升值不要以为只是美国政府行为干预的结果,其实普通美国百姓,尤其是犹太人也参与了日圆升值后财富转移到美国的行动中,甚至有些人是借钱买日圆.日本人民在那次财富转移的过程中保卫了自己的胜利果实了吗?没有!还陶醉在第二经济强国即将赶上地一强国的美梦中未醒,之后就是失去的十年,买的美国物业又被美国人买回还被赚一票.92年英镑一夜贬值20%,百姓的财富一夜贬值20%,开始不知道是谁干的,后来揪出了索罗思(其实他的资金只占1%),老百姓的反映是:他干得真好,打跨了我们的政府!这怎么看都像败家子说的话,英国能这样干美国一回吗?97年金融危机,那些南亚国家的国民保护了自己的劳动果实了吗?没有,想保保不住!99年的香港顶住了,后来中航油被逼空,和05年的期铜被扎空吓得中资公司纷纷严令禁止做期货….

9.国家的门终究是要敞开的,虽然我们的国库里充满了枪支弹药,但是没有可以冲锋陷阵的职业军人去打赢国际金融战争.成长起来吧,我的中国朋友,未来无法预料,无论日美,无论从哪来,我们的财富不应该被夺走,不但要保卫自己,还应该想方设发把他们的财富搬到我们自己的家里来,如果他们来入侵的话!小孩可以成长为大人,游击队可以变成正规军,正规军可以升级为多国部队!这样的人才多多益善!


谨以此文献给即将奔赴战场的勇士和即将在大战中牺牲的将士!

The birth of a FOSS application

The birth of a FOSS application

Friday January 19, 2007 (09:01 PM GMT)

By: Brice Burgess

Late in 2005, my brother needed free, easy to use mailing list software to reach out to some 3,000 fans he acquired while touring the country with his band King Wilkie. As his technical expert, I was unable find a FOSS application that met his need for a free, simple, Web-based newsletter that provided the flexibility of mailing subgroups. I decided to roll my own under the GPL -- partially to give back to the FOSS community, partially to practice new programming techniques, and partially to provide a solution. What I learned may be as valuable as the software I helped create.

Before deciding to create yet another mailing list application, I had to ask myself whether it was worth the effort. Was the software-to-be significantly different than what was already available? Could I collaborate on an existing project to achieve my goal? Would it take too much time?

I searched Google and popular software repositories Freshmeat, SourceForge.net, and Hotscripts with keywords like "HTML Mailer," "PHP Mailing List," and "Newsletter." I discovered many mailers, but none matched my requirements. I needed software where subscribers' field values dynamically define what address groups they belong to. This would allow the band to mail volunteers in New York, for instance, by creating an address group named "NY Volunteers" matching subscribers who checked that they wanted to be a volunteer, and who selected New York as their state.

Since I could not find an existing project that matched my needs, nor one I could contribute to without forking, I had to ask myself if I had the development time. The good news is that I was on an extended holiday, working out of a Virginia basement. I had the time to spend and a relatively loose deadline, so I decided to begin my first "serious" open source project. I soon learned that such projects require more devotion than most people imagine. I sat down with pen and paper and planned my feature set, named the project bMail (I usually prefix my projects with "b," my initial), built the program's HTML skeleton, and sifted through the Open Source Web Design site to establish a look and feel. I created the bMail project on SourceForge.net and set up version control.

Early bMail development was kludgy, lacking in peer review or community feedback, and done in haste to meet the band's minimal requirements. When it reached a "usable" state in February 2006, I decided to make initial announcements on Freshmeat.net and Hotscripts.com. These sites are the New York Times of FOSS scripts, and their listings are free, re-occurring full page ads. The publicity brought in interest from the public, and with the public came the need to make things better. The incompleteness, lack of documentation, and ugly code practices were, frankly, embarrassing. All of a sudden bMail became a daunting task -- there was more to be done than could be accomplished by a single unpaid person. My milestones seemed far-reaching, and my forums were full of sysadmin 101 responses.

To top things off, I received a cease and desist letter about the bMail name, which turned out to be the same as an established Windows-based mass mailer. I was ready to abandon ship. It would have been easy to fold. After all, I had already accomplished my main goal of providing "usable" mailing list software for the band.

Positive public reaction, however, gave me new inspiration. A handful of users expressed true interest in the project. I began to receive translations, the first being Romanian. Corinna Thoeni, an Italian developer, inquired on pitching in and now maintains an experimental SVN branch. Stephane Faroult, a French SQL expert, volunteered his advice. Carey Williamson avidly volunteered his support in the forums. A community was forming, and it proved to be a source of ideas and motivation. I began work began on refactoring the framework, and in late April 2006 the project was renamed poMMo -- short for "Post Modern Mass Mailing Organizer," "Penniless, Open Mass Mailing Organizer," or "Piece Of My Mother's Okra."

Thinking about starting your own FOSS project? Here are some resources and doctrines to consider.

* Use the proper tools
o Version control (SVN or CVS)
o Sourceforge.Net
o Trac
* Community Necessities
o Forums
o Mailing lists
o IRC
* Open policy
o Public mailing lists
o Trust in users
o Development roadmap
o Development blog
* Support
o Developer and user documentation
o Friendly, prompt support
* Preparation
o Be prepared to take responsibility
o Time dedication
o Timely bug and security fixes
* Eye candy
o Online demonstration/video
o Screenshots
o Nice logo

The community soon became poMMo's lifeline, and I began committing more time to the project. My developer buddies soon noticed all the time I was spending on poMMo, and asked "Why poMMo? Why not PHPList?" It's the de-facto FOSS newsletter mailer, sporting advanced features such as subscriber fax. I told them, "You'll see." I wanted to create a simpler alternative, a choice, another fish in the FOSS pool. While I certainly could have forked a trimmed-down hard-coded version of PHPList that would have worked for the band, the flexibility I envisioned in poMMo's customizable subscriber fields and filtering groups required a different architecture than what existed in all the other newsletter applications I saw.

Above all, poMMo is a collaboration effort. I'm always disappointed to hear open source project members say that they had "their developer" modify an aspect of the program without ever hearing from that developer or seeing any of the code. This is not progressive. I hope to transition poMMo development efforts to a wider group of individuals. I am always happy when others seek to help out, maintaining open discussion and policy. Admittedly, having detailed contributor guidelines and strong documentation would help, but this project is still in its infancy. We do have a game plan, however -- a vision for version 1.0.

And so poMMo development continues, as it strives to fill the niche of a simple, flexible FOSS mass mailer that the world can find utility in. We introduced the third framework rewrite in December, and that is beginning to stabilize. Rowan Walker, an Australian HTML wizard, has contributed a breathtaking theme that can be seen in the online demo. A slew of logos have been submitted, and the program has been translated to 12 languages so far. I have not asked anyone for their contributions -- they have all come out of the blue by good people around the world.

At this point the software is far from complete. The community forums and feature list grow, the bugs come and go, developers hope for donations, and downloads increment. Such is the life of a Free Software project.

http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/jan07/bittner/index.html

Measuring project health: Part One

Level: Introductory Kurt Bittner,Program Director, Emerging Technologies, IBM 15 Jan 2007 from The Rational Edge: What project managers choose to measure as a gauge on performance generally receives the team's special attention. Naturally, project health depends on accurate metrics, but more importantly it requires that the right things be measured. This article describes some of the fallacies associated with traditional software project metrics, then focuses on effective measurement during the Inception phase. Most organizations use measurements in various ways to assess performance or effectiveness of various courses of action. Without measurement they have little more than subjective observation to determine whether things are on track; measurement is inevitable. But measurement is a tricky thing -- many times you cannot directly measure what you really want to know about, as in cases where you measure increases in output (productivity) when you really would like to know about effectiveness of resource utilization. There is a more subtle aspect to measurement: People pay attention to things being measured, and assume those measured things are important. Even when measurements are not directly tied to rewards, they will work to improve their performance in areas where they perceive they are being measured. Perception is key: Sometimes managers overtly say one thing and reinforce something else through measurements, effectively undermining their stated objectives. Measurement implies that the thing being measured is meaningful. Here's the point: People look to the measurements for cues about what is important. They will interpret this information, and they will often change their behavior to deliver what they think the people directing the measurement want. This effect shows itself in a number of ways -- from telling managers what they think they want to hear when asked "how is the project going?" to reporting sometimes more, sometimes fewer, hours than were actually worked, depending on whether they think working more hours than expected is a good thing (often the sign of a "hero culture") or a bad thing (working more hours than expected is sometimes a sign of a project in trouble). The best way to counter the unintended consequences of measurement is to be completely transparent about what you are measuring and why, which requires you to be completely transparent about project goals and how measurements relate to project goals. This is the first in a series of articles that addresses measurement in the iterative software development lifecycle. It describes some of the fallacies associated with traditional software project metrics, then focuses on effective measurement during the Inception phase. Subsequent installments will cover measurement during the Elaboration, Construction, and Transition phases. Measurements and goals Before you decide what to measure, you need to decide what is important. Most organizations focus on goals that fall into three areas: Reducing the time it takes to deliver a solution (time to market), subject to a minimum level of functionality, and a given level of quality and cost Reducing cost, subject to a minimum level of functionality, and a given level of quality and usually constraints on time to market Improving quality, subject to constraints on a minimum level of functionality, and on cost and time to market The essence of project management is to manage these trade-offs in an acceptable way to achieve the desired result. In order to do so, targets need to be set for these four areas. Most projects measure cost and time, but scope and quality affect cost and time and need to be measured as well. In fact, most measures of project success must include more than cost and time -- the delivered solution needs to do something useful (scope) and must do so with acceptable quality. Variability and goals "Prediction is very difficult--especially about the future." -- Niels Bohr A goal is a kind of prediction -- a statement about what will constitute success at some point in the future. Reality may fall short of the goal, or, if you're lucky, it may exceed the goal. In statistical terms, project results are random variables, and goals are estimates of desired values for those random variables. The key thing to remember about random variables is that actual observations are centered around an average, or mean value. The spread of the distribution, called its variability, indicates the degree to which observed values will vary from the mean. In a symmetrical distribution, values are equally likely to fall above the mean as below it, and the most likely value, the mode, is equal to the mean. Figure 1 shows a typical normal probability density function, so called because most observations fall into this sort of distribution. Figure 1: Normal probability density function, which illustrates that actual observations may vary from the expected (or average) One of the key mistakes that people make about goals is that they specify only one number for a goal -- the expected value (or mean value) to be achieved. But reality is variable -- and to take this into account we need to establish tolerances for goals, within which performance is considered acceptable. Doing so is a useful exercise, because it forces you to consider the amount of variability you will find acceptable, and it will prevent unnecessary focus on minimizing irrelevant variability while maintaining focus on important variance. Measurement and iterative development One of the principal benefits of an iterative approach is that it makes a conscious effort to reduce variance over the course of the project, as shown in Figure 2 below. Note that this illustration turns the sample from Figure 1 on its side, achieving a very narrow distribution toward the end of the iterative lifecycle. Figure 2: The iterative development approach reduces variance over the course of a project The line labeled "x" represents the expected value of an estimate, while the dashed lines above and below this line represent the expected variation around these estimates. Over the course of the project, the variation decreases as risks are retired as shown in Figure 3. Figure 3: Risk, which greatly contributes to variance and unpredictability, is reduced over time in an iterative project Each of the four phases shown in Figure 3 -- Inception, Elaboration, Construction and Transition -- focus on mitigating different types of risks. As a result, the goals for each phase differ as well. This means that the measurements used to track progress toward project goals need to change phase by phase. When measurement goes wrong Among the absolute worst practices followed by many organizations is "detailed planning, then measuring to plan." Planning and measurement, by themselves, are not bad things, but the timing employed by most organizations actually does more to encourage the wrong behavior than any other single practice. Here's what normally happens: A project is initiated, and as one of the earliest actions a project manager creates a project plan. Based on sketchy information about the problems to be solved and vague goals, the project manager does his or her best to "guess" what the schedule and costs will look like. No matter how many caveats are put forth about the tentative nature of the plan, the plan takes on a life of its own. Managers higher in the organization lose sight of the fact that early plans are really just thought experiments that are no more valid than the assumptions on which they are based. The plan becomes a kind of prediction about what success will look like, and the focus of management oversight shifts to measuring deviations from plan, rather than on steering the project toward a successful outcome. The plan becomes a kind of albatross around the neck of the project manager.1 Project team members are discouraged from taking actions that are not in accordance with the plan, even when everyone seems to know that the plan is a complete fiction, disconnected from the daily realities of the project. While the plan could, in theory, be correct, it is very unlikely that it will be. When such a plan inevitably fails to perfectly anticipate the future, managers who unquestioningly follow it often lead their teams and projects to failure. When the plan fails to match reality the only logical course is to deviate from the plan, but when the management system punishes deviations from plan, it often leaves the team with no option but to create the illusion that they are following the plan even when they are not. This sort of behavior does no one any good. Why does this sort of thing happen? The problem is not planning per se, but rather planning in the absence of reality and in opposition to experience. The problem is planning in detail things that cannot be planned at all, because not enough is known, and then holding the team "accountable" for adherence to the fabrication. A better approach is to understand where the project needs to end up, and then to use flexibility in steering toward that goal continuously throughout the entire project. In order to do this, you need to be looking for the right information at different points in the project. What's wrong with detailed up-front planning? While the preceding discussion touches upon what is wrong with planning in detail at the project outset, the practice is so pervasive and such a part of the project management tradition that it needs special attention to discourage its use. Briefly, creating and managing to a detailed plan early in the project is wrong because: It is unrealistic to expect that a project manager should be capable of the technical depth necessary to determine project activities and their timing for the technical work on the project. Milestones and goals can be determined, but the actual work that will be needed to reach those goals is beyond the technical understanding of the project manager. The technical expertise needed to plan at any meaningful level of precision requires the involvement of the larger development team, and any "planning" done by the project manager is likely to be speculative at best. The uncertainty of specific courses of action early in the project is sufficiently high that even detailed plans created by the development team are highly speculative. The early days and weeks of the project are characterized by lack of reliable information about even what problems need to be solved and what goals need to be achieved; detailed planning in light of this lack of information is simply a waste of time. If detailed planning is a waste of time, measuring to a detailed plan created early in the project is dangerous and often dooms the project to fail. Holding people accountable for flawed and faulty plans discourages people from taking the right actions when information becomes available. It can also force people to take the wrong actions because the plan tells them to do so, or, more often, it encourages them to create "two sets of books": one for the "real" project work and one that tracks back to the original but flawed plan against which they are being measured. Either way, the early detailed plan encourages the wrong behavior. So if measuring the project against a detailed project plan is not the right approach, what should be measured to ensure that a project is on track? Deciding what to measure -- phase by phase The short answer is, you need to measure different things at different points in the project. The project can be broken into the four phases of the unified process (Inception, Elaboration, Construction, and Transition), each of which focuses on a different set of goals pertaining to their different associated risks. That is, each phase focuses on mitigating a different set of risks. But before we get to a discussion of risk, it's important to understand the broad goals we recommend for each of the phases, as shown in Figure 4. Figure 4: Goals and objectives associated with each of the four lifecycle phases This article and subsequent articles will describe how to establish appropriate measurements to determine if the project is on track to achieving these goals. What to measure in the Inception phase The Inception phase has the following goals: To identify and mitigate business, project, and funding risks To assess the viability of the project, both technically and financially To agree to the scope and objectives of the project To form an overall plan for moving ahead Every project needs to be funded for at least the Inception phase; funding for subsequent phases will depend on the outcome of the Inception phase. The focus of the Inception phase is on mitigating the risk that the project might be either economically undesirable or technically infeasible. For this, the team must explore the benefits and costs of the project so that a firm decision can be made about whether to proceed. At the end of the Inception phase, the stakeholders agree that the project is feasible and that the business case for the project is achievable if the project proceeds as planned. Everyone must agree that the project is viable -- that is, that the project is worth doing, and the time and cost estimates are credible. If these things cannot be agreed, then it is best to forego the project and turn your attention to more worthy projects. Measurement in this phase is focused on answering the following questions: What is the business benefit of the project? What is the expected cost to deliver the business benefit? Is the project worth completing? The first two questions are the hard ones, and will dictate the answer for the third question. In the next two sections we will discuss how to measure the business benefit and expected cost, and how to factor these answers into an overall measurement plan. Assessing financial viability The expected business benefit establishes constraints on what the business is willing to spend to obtain those benefits. At this phase of the project, precise estimates are not needed; rough estimates should be sufficient to establish that there is clear value in pursuing the project. Business benefits are usually expressed in terms of net present value, which takes into account the time-value of money obtained, as well as risk. Mathematically, it is defined as: where the "end of the project" is really the lifespan of the solution and r is the discount rate, or required rate of return, of the project. Some attention should be given to choosing the required rate of return to make sure that it adequately accounts for the risk of the project. Typically the required rate of return is based on projects of equivalent risk. Ignoring the initial investment (covered in the next section about project cost), the business benefits are estimated by the future cash flows arising from the solution -- both the positive ones related to increased revenues as well as negative cash flows resulting from expected maintenance. Supporting evidence for the business benefit estimates usually includes market research data for new products or services, business cost data for projects focused on cost reduction, or both. As the NPV formula implies, the specific timing of the estimates is important; benefits received sooner are much more valuable than benefits received in the future. The benefits for projects driven by compliance regulations are easier to estimate. The project benefit is estimated by the penalty avoidance. The timing of the benefits of compliance is still important, however. Assessing technical viability and estimating overall project cost Obtaining estimates on the expected cost can, in theory, be obtained from parametric estimation models based on historical cost data2, but the scarcity of available data relevant to the project at hand usually means that you must build some small but representative part of the system in order to extrapolate project cost and schedule data. It helps to choose a few representative scenarios and develop the software to deliver them. Doing this will usually confirm whether or not your assumptions about the project's technical complexity are correct, even if you have to "stub out" a fair amount of the system functionality. Even if you have parametric estimation models, the early prototyping effort will help you to validate the parametric estimates. From this early prototyping effort, two main results emerge: a qualitative assessment of whether the project is technically feasible, and quantitative measures of project schedule and cost. The raw data obtained from the early prototyping is typically fed into one or more estimation models to derive cost information. Using more than one model is a useful way to cross-validate estimates -- wide differences in predictions provided by the models are signals that you should analyze your assumptions more carefully. Figure 3 presented an expected risk curve for the project, with risks peaking in the early Elaboration phase and declining afterward. Note that this curve represents the ideal risk profile you should strive for; you will achieve that only if you are actively and aggressively managing risk. There is nothing magical about the mere passage of time that causes risks to decline in number and severity. In order to bring risks under control, you must have a sense of what risks you face and when you expect to mitigate them. Many projects collect a risk list, usually early in the project; but unless the risk list is used as a key management tool, it will do little good. It is not enough to simply collect a risk list; you also need to map the risks onto iterations in an overall project plan, then later plan activities that will mitigate the risks assigned to the iteration as part of the iteration plan. In the early mapping of risks to iterations you don't need to create a detailed plan of project activities; just mapping risks to iterations is good enough for now. Doing so will give you a sense of whether you are addressing risks early enough. As you assign the risks to iterations, make sure to assign big risks to early iterations. In order to do this mapping, some exploration needs to happen in the Inception phase to even understand what risks you may face. Mapping out these risks and then making some educated guesses about what kind of work will need to happen in order to address the risks will give you a sense of what resources will be required, by iteration. Again, the goal is not to create a detailed plan but to provide a general roadmap for project staffing. This staffing model (or "map" if the word "model" sounds too formal) will provide input to the overall cost estimate by establishing timing for the costs. Iteration in the Inception phase Sometimes it takes more than one iteration to determine the business viability of the project. This usually happens because of unexpected difficulty in determining the technical or financial viability of the project. Consistent with what we have discussed so far regarding risk, it sometimes takes more than one iteration to mitigate the business risks associated with the project. Usually the Inception phase is "timeboxed," meaning that a pre-determined amount of time, usually a month, is given to the phase. Normally the Inception phase has only a single iteration; at the beginning of the project there is usually no reason to assume otherwise. As the iteration progresses and nears the end, sometimes the results are sufficiently inconclusive to warrant further exploration, but not so conclusive to dictate abandoning the project. As a result, an additional iteration is funded to conclude the investigation. Early in my career my employer used a process which had as its first phase a "feasibility study". The Inception phase serves this purpose, but with a twist: it is typically essential to do some prototyping to explore the technical feasibility of the project, whereas the old "feasibility study" was often a largely theoretical undertaking. Determining project viability Determining financial viability is usually a two-step process. First, there is often a time to market factor to consider: sometimes if a solution cannot be delivered to market within a specific time window, the project is not worth completing. If the time to market requirement can be met, then the NPV of the proposed solution is calculated. If the NPV is negative then the project is not worth pursuing. If the NPV is positive then the project may be worth pursuing, provided that it does not compete for funding with other higher-valued projects.3 Factoring risk into goals tends to be subjective and is best accomplished by increasing the variability of the estimates -- in effect, by widening the "margin for error". Most estimates in this phase are, in reality, highly subjective and can be off by wide margins. The most valuable question to ask about an estimate is not "is it accurate?" but "how wide a range of values is possible?" Alternatively, variability in the estimates can be accommodated by increasing the required rate of return for the project in the NPV calculation. Typically, a number of scenarios are analyzed to determine the expected case and the worst case values for NPV. Often the decision to go ahead with a project is based on whether the worst-case NPV is within acceptable limits. Once the solution is deployed, the estimated NPV will become important as a measure against which actual results are compared. Other measures While estimated NPV remains the most important measure in the Inception phase, other measures must be considered for those projects that will be funded: Subjective measures such as: Customer satisfaction. Is the sponsoring organization happy with progress being made? Morale. Is the project team happy with progress being made? Are they confident (at least guardedly so) in success? Objective measures such as: Absolute progress. As measured by whether the phase completed within expected time frames. Requirements stability. As measured by how much the project's goals changed over the course of the phase. A lot of change means that the projects goals may still be in flux, which would mean that the NPV estimates may be partially or fully suspect. Risk stability. As measured by how much the project's risks are still being discovered. It's hard to know what you don't know, so this is also partially a subjective measure, but if new major risks are still being discovered at a significant rate it is a sign that you may not have a good enough understanding of the solution or the business needs to proceed. Over the course of the project, you will need to be gathering data and comparing it to expectations to keep the project on track. You will not have a lot of data on the following measures in the Inception phase, but you need to have mechanisms in place to gather the data before you leave the phase. In all these measures, trends are more important than absolute values. Effort expended. Actual versus expected Defect discovery and fix trends. Actual and expected Risk discovery and mitigation. Actual and expected Unplanned work identified and implemented, including scope changes Planned work implemented and tested. Actual and expected In all of these, the estimates are fairly coarse. For things like planned work, a map of scenarios onto iterations is sufficient. How to work with these measures in the subsequent phases of the project will be the topic of subsequent articles. Taken together, these initial measures, coarse as they are, provide a framework for measuring project progress and health that will be used throughout the project to determine whether the project is on track. It is worth noting that determining not to fund a project is a perfectly acceptable outcome of the Inception phase and should not be regarded as a failure so long as the decision is based on measures of the business value to be delivered and the technical feasibility. In fact, deciding not to further fund the project may be the best possible outcome if it frees resources for other more worthy projects. Summary The goal of every project team should be to increase the probability of project success while minimizing time and cost. This general goal ties back to the general goals of the business, which are to deliver some improved capability to its customers within a desired time frame and with acceptable quality and within acceptable ranges of business value delivered. Using the right measurements will help achieve these goals by providing clear guidance to team members about what is important. Clear measures are those that are visibly tied to project performance and project health, and that actually help the team to deliver successfully. Keeping measures simple helps the team focus. And simple measures have other benefits as well: they reduce reporting overhead, and make interpretation of the measurements easier as well. Measuring the right things will encourage healthy project behavior, while measuring the wrong things is not only a waste of time and resources, but also sends the wrong message to the team about what is important. Varying the measures according to the lifecycle phases lets people focus on the risks and issues that are of greatest importance, at the time when this attention will have the greatest impact. While we say that the value of the iterative approach is to reduce project risk over time, reinforcing this message with the right measurements enables the team to put this into action. In the Inception phase, measurement is mainly focused on establishing the financial and technical viability of the project, and in so doing establishing cost and overall schedule and risk mitigation goals for the remainder of the project. Financial viability is based on analyses of market needs and opportunities, expressed in terms of cash flows over time, while technical viability is assessed through one or more prototypes that explore alternative technical approaches, as well as their costs and benefits. By the end of the phase, the information obtained from these exploration will provide the bases for a measurement framework that will be used later in the project to determine whether the project is on track. Further reading This article was drawn from material initially presented in Managing Iterative Software Development Projects, by Kurt Bittner and Ian Spence, and published in 2006 by Addison-Wesley. Notes 1 If the reference to the albatross is confusing, I encourage you to read "The Rime of the Ancient Mariner" by Samuel Taylor Coleridge. 2 E.g., models such as CoCoMo II, Coarse-grained Wide-band Delphi (i.e., consensus-based estimates), and function point analysis (including "use-case points"). 3 Project portfolio management is actually a little more complex than suggested here, due to project interrelationships, but for now we'll leave it at this. We will return to portfolio management concerns in a later article.

http://www.microsoft.com/midsizebusiness/businessvalue/webmarketing.mspx

Web 2.0 marketing: What it can do for you

By Douglas Gantenbein

Today's Web technologies offer richer, more interactive methods for midsize companies to target new audiences and measure marketing results. But you must research the options — and caveats — carefully before jumping into this fast-paced new world of marketing.

In Summary:

•	Compared to traditional methods, online marketing is increasingly flexible and affordable for small and midsize companies.
•	Social networking advertising and blogs, in particular, require that you regularly update the content and concept.
•	Software services that track customer behavior on the Web simplify the task of measuring results.

The advent of Web 2.0 characterizes the shift in the World Wide Web from a collection of static sites and experiences to a global space where broadband connections and multimedia applications deliver deeper content and richer interaction between individuals. Some of these Web 2.0 services and companies have appeared out of nowhere to quickly change the dynamics of Internet marketing and advertising. For example, the online video sensation YouTube was founded by two young California entrepreneurs in February 2005; less than two years later it was sold to Google (in October 2006) for $1.65 billion.

This is good news for midsize marketers, because new applications such as blogs, wikis, and online video advertising can level the playing field with larger companies, since these tools are far more affordable than traditional advertising methods. Yet, given the wide array of options, confusion reigns when it comes to selecting online marketing strategies.

A cool appraisal of the world of Web marketing can help ensure that your company spends its Internet marketing dollars wisely. The overview below provides some of the more popular online marketing methods and how you can take advantage of them.

Top of page

1. Social networking sites

Characterized by YouTube, Facebook, and MySpace, these sites allow people to upload content such as videos or personal profiles. Wildly popular with young people, marketers are starting to invest in social networking advertising. (Microsoft provides the digital advertising technology for Facebook, the second-largest networking site.)

The good: Marketing on such sites helps companies reach a younger, arguably more fickle audience that is beginning to ignore traditional advertising. Unilever, for example, promotes its Axe deodorant on a MySpace page dedicated to what it calls "Gamekillers" — people who interfere with a young man's efforts to find dates.

What to watch out for: Anyone can set up a MySpace page, but it pays to keep the concept fresh, as Volkswagen learned with its 2005 launch of a profile for a character in its commercials. Already, Volkswagen marketers told The New York Times, the "Helga" profile is losing appeal as other marketers have invaded MySpace. As well, recent reports in the San Francisco Chronicle and other media indicate that members of such sites are becoming disgruntled with the way advertisers are targeting them.

Top of page

2. Blogs

Online journals of commentary and chat, blogs are everywhere on the Web. The corporate world is now using them to subtly market their products or develop a brand image. Microsoft engineers blog about Windows Internet Explorer and other products, for example, while General Motors runs a blog that discusses topics ranging from auto racing to car design.

The good: Executed correctly, blogs give marketers a chance to build an informal dialogue with customers. Companies can test new product ideas, for instance, to see how customers react. Blogs are generally inexpensive, too, costing perhaps $2,000 to $5,000 for design.

What to watch out for: To be successful, marketers must spend time regularly updating blogs, which makes them a high-maintenance option. As well, blogs must be honest. Wal-Mart posted a blog about a couple traveling across the United States and parking their motor home at Wal-Mart stores. But it was revealed that the blog was a fictional story written by Wal-Mart's public relations firm, and the retail giant wound up with a major credibility problem. With blogs so common — it's estimated that 35 million of them clutter the Web — it's tough to distinguish yours from all the others. Your best bet is to drive traffic to your blog by marketing it through other channels, such as within e-mail newsletters or online ads.

Top of page

3. Podcasts

Podcasts are audio programs that can be downloaded and played anytime on an MP3 player, and they can hold a user's attention like a good book. Whirlpool, for example, has developed a series of 20-minute "American Family" podcasts that cover topics such as making Halloween costumes or managing a gambling addiction.

The good: While not directly "selling" Whirlpool products, the podcasts attempt to give consumers a reason to know and like the Whirlpool brand before they shop for a washer or dryer, says Audrey Reed-Granger, Whirlpool"s public relations director, who creates the podcasts. "These are people who want to listen to good programming while in their cars, or as background when they're working at home," she says.

What to watch out for: Since marketers can only measure the number of podcast downloads, it's impossible to know whether people actually listen to them, warns Eric Weaver, director of strategic marketing for the Seattle marketing firm Girvin.

Top of page

4. Intelligent press releases

These "direct-to-consumer" press releases about products or company services can be written with search-friendly terms and then placed with online news sites that index or "aggregate" them and send headlines to subscribers.

The good: A company selling marketing tools or services, for instance, might write releases with terms such as "accelerate sales cycle" to direct search-engine users to company information. Windows Internet Explorer 7.0 will create opportunities in this area, as it has features that simplify subscribing to news feeds.

What to watch out for: News feeds and releases have saturated the Internet, and it can be difficult to make your release to stand out from the rest. Make sure to invest in high-quality copywriting services, so that your press release headlines and storylines are credible, compelling, and appropriate to your customer base.

Top of page

5. Targeted advertising

Search-engine advertising — where companies pay to have their Web site displayed on search-engine results — has been big for several years. But now companies can target their ads within the context of what people are reading online.

The good: Using technology and services from companies such as AdValiant, Touch Clarity, and Pulse 360, for example, a mortgage company's ads might appear in articles about home improvement or real estate. It can also target ads to readers within a geographic area, such as states where the mortgage company operates.

What to watch out for: Most targeted advertising contracts stipulate that the advertiser pays a certain fee per click. In case an ad generates a surge in clicks, be sure to set limits on what you are willing to spend without notification from the marketing company.

Top of page

Measure what you do

Web 2.0 marketing has one great advantage: Technology today makes it easy to measure results. For example, through conversion-tracking services, Web traffic can be analyzed to determine how many site visitors actually do what marketers desire — read about a product, order a product, or subscribe to a newsletter. ClickTracks, one online tracking service, charges $500 for a package that measures basic activity on a Web site, according to the company's site. For companies posting blogs, firms such as BlogPulse and Technorati can help them track who is linking to a blog site and what’s being said about it.

With so many options available — and most of them priced at a small percentage of the cost of television, print, or radio advertising — experts advise experimenting a bit to determine which method or combination of methods suits your customers. With the right approach, a company can take advantage of Web 2.0's incredible reach and the opportunity it affords to connect with customers in an entirely new way.

A journalist for more than 20 years, Douglas Gantenbein writes often on technology for Microsoft. His work has appeared in Business 2.0, Scientific American, Popular Science, and other magazines.

魂を込めずに作られたルールに意味はない。

●杓子定規に規約を守るためだけに作業するもの、目的を忘れてルールのための作業に没頭する者がいるのだ。実質的な障害は目立ちにくいが、彼らが周囲に与える悪影響は小さくない。

●魂を込めずに作られたルールに意味はない。経営書の名著ビジョナリーカンパニー２ではこう強調する。企業にとって、正しい基本的理念があるのではない。大切なのは、従業員がどれだけ基本理念に陶酔しているかだ！

●プロジェクトの目的を忘れ、形だけ当てはめようとすると、ルールのための仕事をしているようになってしまう。このような状況を目の当たりにするたび、悲しい思いに包まれる。

ビジョナリー・カンパニー ２ － 飛躍の法則

ブリッジＳＥとは

http://aicoach.tea-nifty.com/offshore/2004/07/post_4.html

ブリッジＳＥとは

オフショア開発では、大規模なプロジェクトを通じて、大幅なコストダウンを狙います。ところが、単に費用削減を狙ったオフショア開発では、期待するほどの効果があがらなかったり、社員の定着率の悪さから事業継続が困難になるという事態が発生します。

そこで、日本と中国の文化や言葉の壁を越える鍵として、ブリッジＳＥと呼ばれる職種が脚光を浴びるようになっています。

IT Square「5分でわかるIT｜オフショア開発とブリッジSE」によると、

ブリッジSEとは、ITのスキルだけでなく言語や文化など両国間(例えば中国と日本)のビジネス習慣を熟知し、間に立って円滑に業務を進められるよう指示できるSEのことです。 SEの能力に加え、プロジェクトマネージャーとしての能力、そして言語力が求められていることが分かります。さらに、開発パートナーの指導、教育、管理が行える人材であれば、納期の厳守に加え、高品質なシステム開発が期待できます。 http://www.sw.nec.co.jp/lecture/word/offs/

ブリッジＳＥには様々な定義がありますが、本ブログでは次の通りとします。

ブリッジＳＥとは、中国ソフトウェア開発プロジェクトで日本企業と中国企業との間に入ってコミュニケーションの橋渡しをする【中国人】責任者のこと。

日本のお客様と中国ベンダーとの間で、見積りやチームのスケジュール、および相互のフィードバックによる結果など全体を管理する【中国人】ＳＥ（システムエンジニア）と定義することもできます。

最近では、主に日中間を結ぶブリッジSEの人材派遣サイトが登場しているようです。

本ブログの定義に従うと、ブリッジＳＥはプロジェクトの勘所を押さえる重要な役割が期待されているため、人材派遣サイトから簡単に調達できるような職業ではありません。

一般的なブリッジSEへの期待事項

・ 日本語と中国語が両方できること
・ プロジェクト管理や設計業務

中には、「主に中国とのオフショア開発における契約内容の把握、スケジュール管理、要員管理、リスク管理によりプロジェクトを推進」という要求もあるようです。

正直なところ、このような高度な職務を遂行する中国人ＳＥにはほとんどお目にかかったことがありません。本当に優秀な中国人は、すでに副総経理クラス(会社役員）の重責を担っています。

つまり、会社経営に忙しくて、特定プロジェクトを担当するブリッジＳＥとして採用するのは非常に困難であるといえます。

これまでは、「ブリッジＳＥ」という職種だけが先行して実態が伴わない状況が続いていましたが、今後はプロジェクト成功に貢献する本物の橋渡し人材が求められます。

-------------------------
オフショア開発中、ブリッジSEがキーマンであると思います。プロジェクト成功できるかどうかブリッジSEレベルによってかわります。

ブリッジSEレベル
◇一般　
　基本能力
◇良い
　基本能力＋管理、提案能力
◇とても良い
　基本能力＋管理、提案能力＋戦略的な能力＋人間関係

------------------------
→基本能力
・設計スキル
・日本語の会話力
・日本語の読解力
・日本語の作文力

→管理、提案能力
・プロジェクト管理能力
・見積の作成能力
・提案能力

→戦略的な能力
・調整力
・開発作業を自分がやるより他人に任せる
・性格
　例えば：相手の考えを聞き、相手の立場で考える
…　

→人間関係

-------------------------------------

皆さんの内容を拝見して、日本のブリッジＳＥって、まるでスーパーマンのように感じています。

今の中国では、このようなブリッジＳＥは恐らくいないだろうと思っています。

なぜかと言うと、
・プロジェクト管理能力
・見積の作成能力
までの能力を備えている人は、皆部長とか、少なくとも、ＰＭになっているからです。
ブリッジＳＥが進捗管理、見積、リスク予測まで担当すると、ＰＭの仕事はどうなるだろう。

私が思っているブリッジＳＥは極簡単です。

ブリッジＳＥ＝ブリッジ＋ＳＥ

ブリッジ：
・日本語の会話力
・日本語の読解力
・日本語の作文力
・人間関係

ＳＥ：
・用件分析能力
・提案能力
・設計スキル

---------------------------------------------
発注者側からのＢＳＥに対して
　マネージメント力
　技術力
　コミュニケーション力
　リーダーシップ
など、多くのスキルを期待していると思います。

第1回 WhyとHow、どちらで悩みますか？

http://jibun.atmarkit.co.jp/ljibun01/rensai/eh01/eh01.html

第1回　WhyとHow、どちらで悩みますか？

野村隆
2005/3/2

---

将 来に不安を感じないITエンジニアはいない。新しいハードウェアやソフトウェア、開発方法論、さらには管理職になるときなど――。さまざまな場面でエンジ ニアは悩む。それらに対して誰にも当てはまる絶対的な解はないかもしれない。本連載では、あるプロジェクトマネージャ個人の視点＝“私点”からそれらの悩 みの背後にあるものに迫り、ＩＴエンジニアを続けるうえでのヒントや参考になればと願っている。

---

■ITエンジニアの経験年数と悩みとの関係

　ITエンジニアとしてのキャリアは何年になりますか。連載の第1回の冒頭としては乱暴か書き方かもしれませんが、皆さん、いかがですか。

　3 年以下であれば、悩みはまだ少ないでしょう。石の上にも3年とはよくいったものです。まずは3年を目安に無我夢中でキャリアを磨いてください。3年持たな い人はエンジニアに向いていないのでしょう。多くのITエンジニアを私は見てきました。その中で、ITエンジニアとしてイマイチだったと感じた人が、営業 や人事など、まったく別の職種で大活躍している例を多く知っています。ITエンジニアとしてのキャリアをあきらめることは恥ずべきことではありません。自 分の進むキャリアを思い切って変えて、自分に向いた職種を探すことの方が大切なことです。

　ITエンジニア歴が3～5年程 度になると、見えない壁に当たって悩み始めている人が多いかもしれません。そういう人は、これまでの数年間で自分が磨いてきたスキル、例えば、コンピュー タ言語、ミドルウェア、パッケージソフト、ハードウェアなどの知識やスキルといった何かが身に付いたでしょう。その身に付いたスキルを使う作業で、仕事上 1回区切りがつき、次のキャリアというか専門領域に踏み込むときに悩みが表れることもあるかと思います。

　それは次のような悩みです。いままで磨いてきたスキルをそのまま生かした道を進むべきか、それとも別の路線のスキルを磨くべきか。

　せっかく磨いたスキルだから生かしたい。が、磨いたスキルそのものは、IT業界でいつまでも重宝される保証はありません。だからこそ、悩み始めるのだと思います。

　 そしてITエンジニア歴が5～10年程度の場合は、悩みはより深くなっていることがあるのではと思います。30代前半くらいから、いくつかの専門領域を 持ったが、このままITエンジニアとしてスキルを積んでいく人生が正しいのか、それともマネージャや課長といった管理職としてのスキルをつむことが正しい のか？ 後者のスキルを会社からも求められることが多い中で、自分の進むべき道が見えなくなってしまうことがあると思います。

　 こうした悩みは、ITエンジニアの先輩に聞くまでもなく前からあった話です。ただ、技術革新の速度を考えると、悩み始める時期がより早くなっているのでは ないかと思います。しかし、そうしたことを前提にすべきでしょう。技術革新の波のスピードは止めようがなく、スピードに抗うよりはむしろ、そうしたスピー ドを前提として、自分自身のキャリアのことを考えないと精神的にも、キャリア的にも持たなくなっていると感じるからです。

　つまり、ITエンジニアにとって悩み多き時代になっているのです。IT業界のエンジニアは程度の差こそあれ、皆悩んでいるのです。

　では、悩み多き時代をいかに乗り切ればいいのでしょうか。悩みの根本原因を理解して、対応を考えないと対症療法で終わります。そこで、悩みの根本原因について考えてみましょう。

■悩みの根本原因：現状を打破したいが……

　多くの人は次の図1に表したように、図の右と左のどちらに進むかを悩んでいるのです。

図1　悩みの図。右に行っても左に行っても不安になる しかし、どちらに進むにしても悩みから解放されるわけではありません。そもそも進む方向が決まっていれば悩みはないわけですが……。 　ITエンジニア（技術系）に進む場合は、以下のような不安があると思います。 本当にいまのままのITエンジニアでいいのか。 自分が年を取る中で、ITエンジニアのまま居座り続けることは可能か（特別優れたごく一部のITエンジニアを除き、万人に許されているとは思えない）。 持っているスキルが陳腐化するのではないか。いま持っているスキルとはまったく別のスキルを身に付けないとITエンジニアであり続けることができないのではないか。 IT産業が中国・インドなどで外部委託される流れに伴い、産業の空洞化が進み、ＩＴエンジニアとしての自分の職がなくなるのではないか。 プロジェクトマネージャ（プロマネ。または管理系）に進む場合は、以下のような不安があるでしょう。 従来は培ったスキルで仕事が評価されていたが、評価体系が変わり、自分がいままでどおり評価されなくなるので、いままで培ったスキルがもったいない。 いままで作業してきた、ＩＴエンジニアの仕事と違った職種となるので、果たして、うまくやっていけるのか。 そもそも自分はプロマネに向いていないのではないか。 　現状を打破したい、だけど何をしていいのか分からない、という人は多いでしょう。 　 この場合、ITエンジニアとしての成功体験に引きずられて、常に技術中心に考えてしまうのではないでしょうか。だからといって、自分がスーパー技術者で、 ほかの技術者よりもはるかにエンジニアとして優れているか、というとそういうわけではないでしょう。ITエンジニアとして今後10年、20年やっていく絶 対的な自信、論理的な根拠もないでしょう。 　これらは結局、いったい自分は何になりたいのか、どうありたいのか、という根本的な疑問を抱えてしまっているわけです。 ■株の取引で重要な考え方 　ここでちょっと話題をかえて、株の取引の話をしましょう。 　インターネットを活用した株の取引が盛んです。例えば日本経済新聞には個人投資家のことを伝えるニュースが毎日のように掲載されています。さらに、各種週刊誌には「注目銘柄100選」や「ボーナスで買いたい値上がり銘柄50選」といった記事がよく掲載されています。 　 株式投資においては、週刊誌の注目銘柄を読んで投資するような、Howに固執した「初心者」は負けることが多いでしょう。短期的な金もうけしか考えない、 つまり投機的投資をしている限り、偶然、1回や2回は勝つでしょうが、結局いつか大負けして、結果として損をします。初心者にとっての株式投資は、宝くじ を買っているのとあまり異なりません。How To本とか雑誌のお勧めに従って株を買って、株価が上がることを祈っているだけです。1回1回の取引の勝ち負けに一喜一憂しているわけです。 　つまり「初心者」はHowに固執しているといえます。 　 一方、「株式投資のプロ」は機械的に利益を得ようとします。期待収益が計算されており、リスクを数値化して管理・マネージしているのです。いい方を換える と、株に期待する収益を理解しているので、株でここまでもうけよう、例えば、10回取引して取引元本に対して10％の収益を実現しようといったことが管理 されているのです。 　なぜ株を買うのか。それは期待収益10％を実現するため、というWhyがしっかりしているのです。 　そうなると、「株式投資のプロ」は1回1回の取引の勝ち負けはあまり気にならなくなります。10回、20回という取引のトータルでの負けの金額を少なくし、勝ちの金額を増やすよう、確率を管理するのです。つまり、損をマネージしているから勝つといえるでしょう。 　整理すると、「株式投資のプロ」は、なぜ株を買うのかを理解している、Whyを把握しているので、「マル秘の注目銘柄100」とか「ストップ高間違いなしの20選」というような、本質的でない、表層・小手先のHowに固執しないといえます。 ■技術ではない軸を考える：HowではなくWhy 　話をIT業界に戻しましょう。IT業界においても、How To本は世の中にあふれています。やれ「Excel」や「Word」の入門本から始まって、Java、ネットワーク、データベースなどのHow To本はたくさんあります。 　 確かに手先の技術は重要です。ITエンジニアとしてIT業界にいる以上、ITに関する何らかの技術を持っていなければならないでしょう。開発プロジェクト を進めるうえで、「私は頭がいいですが、ITスキルがありません」という人がいたとして、そういう人と仕事がしたいと思いますか（新人などの場合は別とし て）。そういう人がシステム開発プロジェクトで戦力になるでしょうか。答えはノーです。 　しかし、テクニックに依存していると、手先のテクニック、つまり、Howに振り回されるようになります。株式投資の「初心者」と同様、Howに固執してしまうと、結局、Howを追い掛けるだけで、いつまでたってもHowを永遠に求めるだけになってしまいます。 　前述の、悩みの図では、手先のテクニックを右側のプロマネに求めて会得するか、左側のエンジニアに求めて会得するかの違いでしかありません。Howを追い掛け回して終わりなき旅を続け、いつまでたっても不安は解消されません。 　そうではなく、Whyの軸、なんでこんな仕事をしているのだろう、という軸を考えましょう。図示すると、悩みの横軸をHow、それに対して、縦軸にWhyの軸を入れた図となります（図2）。 図2　WhyとHowとの関係 ■Whyを求めれば将来への悩みは解消される 　IT 業界におけるWhyは、例えば、システム開発プロジェクトを成功させよう、パッケージ開発事業を成就させよう、企業の成長に貢献するシステムを作り上げよ う、という意識、つまり、ITビジネスを成功させるための前向きな考え方です。なぜかというと、ビジネスの視点からすると、ITの手先の技術はあくまでも 手先の技術であって、ビジネス成功のための手段でしかないのです。ITビジネスを成功させるという意識を持っていないと、手先の技術が目的となってしま い、目的と手段を取り違えてしまいます。目的と手段を取り違えてしまうと、いつまでも本質的なことが理解できません。 　冒頭にも書いたように、ITエンジニアとして最初の3年くらいは何も考えず、エンジニアとしての道を求道すべきです。このときは、技術取得が目的であってもいいでしょう。Howにこだわる時期です。それはそれで構いません。 　 経験を重ねるに従い、いつかのタイミングで、Howだけでなく、Whyに気付いて、Whyの方向に向かって自分のキャリアを積むよう志向しなくてはいけま せん。ITの研究開発に従事するごく一部の純粋なITエンジニアを除き、ビジネスマンとしてIT業界に身を置くITエンジニアは、経験年数を積むに従い、 How以上にWhy、つまり、手先の技術よりもITを活用したビジネスの成功への意識付けを持たなくてはなりません。換言すれば、そういう意識改革がなさ れれば、Whyを求めるという方向性が明確化されるので、ITエンジニアとしての将来への悩みは解消されるでしょう。 ■WhyとHowの座標軸 　WhyとHowの座標軸という考え方を活用すると、例えば、Why志向の前向きな人は、エンジニアの方向に進んでも、プロマネの方向に進んでも、あまり変わりがないということがいえるでしょう。図示すると図3のようになります。 図3　Why志向の人は、エンジニアの方向に進んでも、プロマネの方向に進んでも、あまり変わらない 　 方向性としてWhy志向なので、ITビジネスの成功に向けたキャリアを形成しています。ある意味、エンジニアとしてもプロマネとしてもあまりスキルを身に 付けていない（横軸のHowの軸で進歩が少ない）という難点がありますが、管理職、特に上級管理職として一定規模の組織をリードする人はこういうキャリア を今後志向するべきでしょう。 　まだ若い人、管理職手前の方、若手管理職の方は、以下のような曲線のキャリアをイメージし てみてはどうでしょうか。つまり、近いうちはエンジニア、またはプロマネとしてのスキル――横軸のHowのスキルを身に付けます。ただし、一方での、IT ビジネスの成功という縦軸のWhyを忘れずに日々ちょっとずつでも縦軸のスキルを伸ばし、いつかのタイミングで縦軸志向にシフトするという考え方です（図4）。 図4　技術系と管理系のスキルを磨く 　こういうキャリア曲線をイメージしながらキャリアを積むことができれば、技術者としてのキャリアに関する悩みは減るのではないかと思います。主要な理由は以下のようになるでしょう。 将来のビジョンが整理され、クリアになり、精神的に安定する。 横軸のHowに振り回されることがなくなり、縦軸のWhyという新たな軸を意識しながらキャリアを考えることができる。 エンジニア志向、プロマネ志向にかかわらず、IT業界に居る限り、経験年数を経るに従い、縦軸のITビジネスの成功が手先のスキルである横軸のHowに優先することは明確なので、Howにこだわらない気持ちの整理ができる。 IT業界において産業が空洞化しようが、ITというか企業システムがなくなるわけではないので、縦軸のWhyの軸での能力が高ければ、企業内情報システム部、ITコンサルタント、上級SEとして活躍する場は永遠に日本にあるということに気付く。 　皆さんの理解を助けるために、あえて後ろ向きの考え方を書きましょう。 　 皆さんの身の回りに、以下のようなキャリアパスを歩んでいる人はいませんか。例を挙げると、技術スキルが低く、やる気もないけど成り行きで会社に残ってい る20年選手のSE（左下に向かっている矢印の例）とか、管理スキルが低く、プロジェクトにおいて何かといい訳を探しては遅れを報告し、保身に回りながら 他人のアラを探して他人の足を引っ張るダメ課長代理（右下に向かっている矢印の例）とかにありがちなキャリアパスです（図5）。 図5　後ろ向きの意識の人は、縦軸のWhyの軸を上のポジティブなところまで戻すのは時間がかかる 　 こうなってしまっては、縦軸のWhyの軸でポジティブな領域に戻るためには結構な時間がかかります。それはそうでしょう。何年も、場合によっては10年以 上かけて、後ろ向きの根性を持ち続けてきたわけですから、ITビジネスの成功という前向きな気持ちに戻ることは大変な苦労でしょう。何も色の付いていない 若手は、縦軸のWhyについてゼロからの出発となりますが、こういう人は、縦軸のWhyの意識改革はマイナスからのスタートとなるわけです。 ■悩み解消への考え方 　どうですか。HowとWhyの違いはご理解いただけましたか。Whyの軸の重要性を把握できましたか。 　前向きな態度なんて格好悪い、そんな時代じゃないんだよね、というシニカルな方、いつまでたっても新入社員ではないのですから、斜に構えた態度はやめましょう。もっと前向きに、自分の仕事として、IT業界での仕事を考えましょう。 　IT 業界でのエンジニアの悩みは、Whyの軸を伸ばせばいいのだ、とシンプルに考えましょう。物事を難しく考えると、できることもできなくなります。さらにい えば、物事を難しく考える人は、自分が失敗したときに、「理論が難しかったからできなかった。」といういい訳ができるから、という理由で物事を難しく考え るのではないでしょうか。シンプルに考えましょう。自分にいい訳をするほど格好悪いことはありません。 　Howばかりが多い世の中で、Whyの軸を考慮に入れ、エンジニア（技術系）に進むにせよ、プロマネ（管理系）に進むにせよ、Whyの軸で常にポジティブであり続けるよう留意しましょう。 　では、今回のトピックはここでオシマイにします。次回からは、具体的にどうやってWhyの軸においてポジティブになるかについて、具体的に考えていきます。