Risk vs reward or CYA at all costs

Interesting things happened this week and mostly on the exchange migration project.  Seems there are those were not happy with putting Outlook 2007 with an Office 2003 product.  they huffed and they puffed and they claimed that patch management is much more difficult.  Yeah like having to do them in a certain order is something we cannot train chimps to do.  Anyhow seems the higher ups have decided that we are going to put in a lower quality product.  I am not completely happy with this decision as I have always been one who would strive to put in the best product possible for the users and make the changes administratively that were necessary to suppor it.  Seems this is not the prevailing view.  The view tends to be more along the as long as the product can meet minimum requirements then lets choose the one with the lowest possible risk factor. 

Not that either side is completely wrong, but the risks here can be easily mitigated.  Any way I look at it its irrelevant at this time the decision is made and old software has been the victor.

This whole situation has gotten me thinking about corporate life and what are the ethical dilemas that permeate it.  I have seen so many times that the safe has been the choice and it has handcuffed the inventive, the progressive.  Seems this mindset is what makes some corporations average.  Lets look at Google, out there doing great and yet we all can name a bunch of initiatives that didnt pan out.  Some large purchases too that were a flop.  Yet their culture is one of trying, experimenting and striving for the next level, somewhere few have been able to succeed.  It is with this attitude that they have built what so few have.  Now I never want to advocate throwing all caution to the wind, but the safest is not always the best and more often then not it stems the flow of true innovation.

Ok I vented and rambled enough for a holiday morning