プラント業界ではコロナの影響による建設投資額の減少傾向が[1]、業界全体の喫緊の課題として挙がっております。さらには技能労働者数についても2025年に向けて100万人近く不足すると見られています。
そのように楽観を許さない[2]状況下、勝ち残りに向けて[3]、

• 工事に掛かる工数、工期を圧縮して、原価を低減したい
• 工事に対する付加価値を提供し、工事+アルファの売上を上げていきたい

といった課題は多くの方が感じてらっしゃるのではないでしょうか。
本セミナーではそれらの課題に光明を照らす、

• 新デジタル技術の活用により現場作業の効率化
• 新しい施工技術の導入により付加価値の創出
• それらを実現するための人材育成

など、プラント業界[4]における新たな技術を活用したビジネスモデルの構築（= DX）について、これまで大手プラント会社の全社人材教育をはじめ、600社以上のデジタル施策推進支援をしてまいりました弊社STANDARDが具体的な先進事例を交えながら解説します。

1. プラント業界ではコロナの影響による建設投資額の減少傾向が、業界全体の喫緊の課題として挙がっております。
The phrase before が  lacks a verb phrase and is early in the sentence grammatically, so it denotes usage as a "case" (格助詞) particle not the conjunction 'but.' More here.

2. 楽観を許さない
Can't allow optimism, 楽観はできない 

3. 勝ち残りに向けて
to endeavor to succeed, to win

4. プラント業界
Factory, manufacturing industry

5. Sentence breakdown:
プラント業界における新たな技術を活用したビジネスモデルの構築（= DX）について、これまで大手プラント会社の全社人材教育をはじめ、600社以上のデジタル施策推進支援をしてまいりました弊社STANDARDが具体的な先進事例を交えながら解説します。

1. In the plant industry.
2. Business models which were built by making use of new tech in the plant industry.
3. By how large plants trained staff, etc,
4. Our company, having supported over 600 companies digital policy launch
5. Standard will combine advanced case studies to explain.

Our company, Standard, having supported over 600 companies in their digital policy launch, will cover with advanced case studies, through personnel training and other tactics, how business models made use of new factory technology.

Still a bit awkward, but it gets all the points across.

資料：プラント業界のDX〜最新事例から学ぶ！0からDXを推進する為に～

Non-complementary responses and actions are the foundation of successful customer relationships. It's the reason humor is funny. It's the release of the tension that exists from back in the cave-dwelling days. It's the reason we stop and smile at a passage in a book.

It's doing the opposite of the expected. It's telling the typical course of action to fuck off. And business is all about the typical course of action. So the bar is really low.

But the status quo is easy. If someone is a jerk to you, you tend to be a jerk back. When you are not the boss, it is easiest to say yes. When someone brings up something uncomfortable, the natural tendency is to release the tension.

Noncomplementary behavior is more difficult, but sometimes it is the best choice. While complementary behavior is good for building an alliance, noncomplementary behavior is linked with changes in the dynamic. Sometimes, it's really crucial this happens. If nothing changes, nothing changes...

1. Deficiency/Feature Myopia: When people base their entire decision on a single feature or lack of the feature.
2. Responsibility Hot Potato: When problems or responsibilities fall to the most technical or knowledgable person, usually with consequences.
3. Demanding Poor Service: When people demand quick pricing with little discovery, and post-sale is a year long blame-fest because of things that don't perform the non-existent magic they didn't want to discuss.
4. Eyes not on the Prize: When the person is focused on buying something that has nothing to do with their overall goal. Some metric or new technology. Essentially the Self-X/Y problem.
5. The Unreliable Advisor: When the person has someone helping them who is not motivated to tell the whole truth, accept responsibility, or help you at the risk of telling the customer something they don't want to hear. When they have the trust and you don't, you are often on the hook to prove negatives, defend standard operating procedures, or deep dive to explain basics. This is usually while avoiding to openly state your advisor is not being honest.
6. Gratitude Deficiency: When going above and beyond becomes the norm, rolling back to standard service is insufficient. One-time favors become expected.

I do best when I shoehorn creativity into my job, and there usually is some opportunity to do so. It helps make a presentation more interesting, or a project more real if there is some humanity injected into it. At least for me.

When I was playing music, though, it was different. It was my vocabulary, not the undertone or nuance.

I think most creative people come to terms with "making a living" but it's important to me to keep using this muscle, however atrophied it has become.

One of the delusions your home office will believe is that distance doesn't matter to relationships with accounts. This phenomena seems to be based on the fact that it's not weird to be calling Norway or Korea, it's how it's always been done. It's natural.

On the flip side, your home office probably never contracts with a Finnish or South African or Chinese company for anything mission critical, outside of localization. It would be weird and and pain to work with a vendor that has to meet late in the day and always asks how things are in American or your home country. Where every transaction or interaction takes 3x as long.

How effectively you sell this to the executive stakeholders in important and predicts the success of hitting timelines.

One of the easiest way to recognize the Peter Principle in action is by looking at the people who have no interest in a problem's history and context. When there is no accountability, why bother with discovery. Paint over the water damage. Often it's years before the impact of a decision rears its head and it's going to be buried in the noise of a million other good, bad, and ugly decisions.

The new person coming in to shake things up and quickly gets charged with fixing the org's biggest problems. Doesn't bother to learn why things are the way they are. "Context" is boring, recommending that means you are likely part of the problem. Plus, untying a knot doesn't make for an interesting deck versus "Recommendations: Immediately Implement...".

Pile the solution on top. Boss gives them lots of rope to shake things up. Rollout looks good month 1, then problems: People carrying it out "aren't bought in," they leave. But they "weren't on board with new thinking." New hires brought in, this time with new process as SOP, all good, right?

Well the rest of the planet doesn't know this, they still have the same problems the "solution" was meant to fix. Lack of context and understanding of the complexity means that the solution was never going to work.

I see this on the business side more than the technical side. You can't just write new code over old code, although this is Corporate version of "Rip and Replace." The problem is that code is not a fair representation of human interaction, which is where business process emerges from. In code, arguments are defined clearly. Exceptions are thrown when it's given something it doesn't understand. Humans are much more complex. The mere fact process is being changed from above affects the results.

But even then, most humans try to adapt. But good consultants take the time to understand the landscape, and "what got us to this point." But most businesses don't use that practice. In fact, many choose to ignore it willingly in favor of a promise of a quicker fix. This sets up the org for failure and the new employee, who thinks they are the hero being brought in to save the day.

It would make for a very boring drama.

Life is a tragedy in close up, and a comedy in long shot.

  -Charlie Chaplin

Working at a PAAS has helped be crystallize the very fundamental difference between Operating Expenses and COGS. These two accounts used forever confused me in college, and when working in a finance department for several years, I'd always blurt out the wrong one when trying to classify an expenditure. From Investopedia:

• Cost of goods sold refers to expenses directly related to the production of a product.
• Operating expenses refer to expenditures that are not directly tied to the production of goods or services, such as rent, utilities, office supplies, and legal costs.

My company is a tool our customers use build the stuff that feeds their family and keeps the lights on. It's connected to their livelihood. I know this because these decisions are not taken lightly, in the way new curtains or kombucha machine in the office is.

When we aren't reliable it affects people's financial security. When they choose us, or in rare cases, choose another solution, this is often obscured, but easily surfaceable.

Well, mine was, so yours should be too. I barrelled right through, bringing over my one "blog post" content type and deleting the modules and fields I didn't need like a whale skirting between rocks to scrape off barnacles.