5 ms·
I thought you must be kidding about the "hammer-centric methodology": Do companies actually say they have a "tool-centric methodology"? Then I remembered one I
by Stratoscope 13y ago
I thought you must be kidding about the "hammer-centric methodology": Do companies actually say they have a "tool-centric methodology"?
Then I remembered one I saw just the other day:
> We offer a highly configurable Agile and tools-based software development methodology
They also have an "execution-focused leadership team" and "offer a number of flexible outcome-oriented engagement models assuring the success of our projects"
The whole page is like that!
http://accionlabs.com/company/why-accion-labs/ http://accionlabs.com/company/why-accion-labs/
- jarrett 13y agoWow. I've always wondered: Is this kind of empty, buzzwordy writing effective? Does it sell? So many companies write this way. I could believe they do so only because their staff never learned how to write good sales copy. Or is there some actual merit to it? Do they know something I don't--namely, that buzzwords sell?
- vehementi 13y agoI think it's a joke, just based on the obvious word reuse: > We are an innovation focused services firm with 100% focus in the emerging technologies. This razor sharp focus has allowed us to differentiate from our competitors in many different ways:
- jarrett 13y agoMaybe. Though the page, taken in the context of the overall site, doesn't scream satire. I'd be disinclined to put a joke page on my consultancy's website, but if I did, I'd be sure to make the joke 110% clear. So my suspicion is that the word reuse is just the writer's habit, not evidence of a joke. (Many writers have such habits, especially amongst those of us who aren't writers by trade.)
- Stratoscope 13y agoI've actually had some personal interaction with this company, and I'm pretty sure that the writing style is not satire and not a joke. It's the way somebody actually writes.
- SnacksOnAPlane 13y agoOooh, you can work on Web 2.0 AND 3.0. I'm not sure if Web 3.0 is backwards compatible, though.