Mystery novels and mystery movies have a wide following all over the world, and some of their charm surely lies in the revelation of the identity of the criminal. For some mystery buffs, the more startling and unexpected the ending the more satisfied they are. However, even the most rabid whodunit fan will readily admit that the plot and its development, the richness of characterization, the careful planting of clues, and the personality of the detective also contribute greatly to the success of the overall package. The meticulous search for clues and the deductive abilities of Sherlock Holmes and his exchanges with Dr. Watson are as celebrated as Miss Jane Marple and her simple, yet sinister English villagers or Phillip Marlowe's ability to get himself into all sorts of trouble and joke about it. Even in the "Columbo" series, where the viewer, unlike the detective, knows the identity of the perpetrator, our attention tends to be held by the twists and turns of the action, as well as by the idiosyncrasies and feigned ignorance of the detective.
Detective fiction offers a simple analogy to the value-maximizing organization. The ending (result) is important but so too are the plots, characters and action (process). The vehicles of value, so to speak, are as important to measure as the attainment of value. Interdependence, integration and involvement are our three central vehicles to deliver value, with ingraining serving to build them into the fiber of the organization. In a general sense, interdependence comprises the degree of linkage, the immediacy of impact, and the absence of slack resources or insulation