Requirements management

[suityou01]

In a mong kind of way.

You are Ricky Gervais and I claim my 5 free mong jokes.

[Freamon]

Read and re-read this as it sounds like good advice. It just doesn't fit the situation I'm afraid.

ClientCo delivered the dev environment, except that it had no tools installed. They adamantly stated it was the consultancy's responsibility. It was only when the consultancy tapped up the contract they backed down, but not without some serious wriggling and game playing.

All change requests up to now have really stirred up the hornets nest, so for them to roll over today was a surprise.
Was it that someone influential stepped in, or they realised they were in the wrong, irretrievably so and just accepted that?

Or maybe they just didn't see the other change requests as valid?

From their point of view (one which I would have shared when I did supplier management) a change request is just a whinge, unless it is a genuine contractual change. Change requests which are about changes to "signed off documents" are usually a grey area (what does "signed off" mean, is it a contractual deliverable that is specifically called out, is it a genuine change or merely an elaboration/clarification, etc).

Whereas if the contract says explicitly that party X will deliver Y to party Z on a particular date, that sounds more like a genuine change.

The word change can mean many things to many people, and it's always an emotive topic. In the past, suppliers have demanded that my client raises change requests due to the supplier simply misunderstanding something which was later clarified. The absolute best one was when the information was only ever given by verbal communication in the first place. I laughed off all of these change requests, as they had no bearing on the contract. (Wasn't a small supplier either, one of the biggest SI's in fact).

[suityou01]

Or maybe they just didn't see the other change requests as valid?

From their point of view (one which I would have shared when I did supplier management) a change request is just a whinge, unless it is a genuine contractual change. Change requests which are about changes to "signed off documents" are usually a grey area (what does "signed off" mean, is it a contractual deliverable that is specifically called out, is it a genuine change or merely an elaboration/clarification, etc).

Whereas if the contract says explicitly that party X will deliver Y to party Z on a particular date, that sounds more like a genuine change.

The word change can mean many things to many people, and it's always an emotive topic. In the past, suppliers have demanded that my client raises change requests due to the supplier simply misunderstanding something which was later clarified. The absolute best one was when the information was only ever given by verbal communication in the first place. I laughed off all of these change requests, as they had no bearing on the contract. (Wasn't a small supplier either, one of the biggest SI's in fact).

Freamon if you sit on the fence too much you lose credibility and get an arse full of splinters.
Where do you stand on scope creep? A change is pretty clear on a fixed price contract. My specifications are explicit. If after the requirements freeze you then ask for something that requires more work to the specification, logical data model, extra dev effort, extra test cases, potential for more bug fixing then this is a change that needs to be priced in.

You liberal daily mail reading types could never run a fixed price project for a consultancy as you'd all go bust in a heartbeat.

[Churchill]

Freamon if you sit on the fence too much you lose credibility and get an arse full of splinters.
Where do you stand on scope creep? A change is pretty clear on a fixed price contract. My specifications are explicit. If after the requirements freeze you then ask for something that requires more work to the specification, logical data model, extra dev effort, extra test cases, potential for more bug fixing then this is a change that needs to be priced in.

You liberal daily mail reading types could never run a fixed price project for a consultancy as you'd all go bust in a heartbeat.

A polite but firm, "Not in the initial release."?

Would that help you?

[suityou01]

A polite but firm, "Not in the initial release."?

Would that help you?

Yip been using that. Not in phase 1. Except it was pointed out that there was no budget for phase 2. There would never be budget for phase 2. In fact I seriously doubt any further work from this client.

So deferring to a non existent phase 2 is a little flaky.

[FiveTimes]

how long is the gig for suity ?

[Churchill]

Yip been using that. Not in phase 1. Except it was pointed out that there was no budget for phase 2. There would never be budget for phase 2. In fact I seriously doubt any further work from this client.

So deferring to a non existent phase 2 is a little flaky.

If there's no budget for phase 2 then there sure as hell no budget for scope creep in phase 1.

Perhaps we can use the feature list covered by "scope creep" as ammunition/justification for phase 2.

You're not very "agile" are you chubs?

That's it, job done, invoice is on your desk.

[Wodewick]

Is anyone actually reading any of this guff?

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ......
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ......
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ......
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ......

Eh Wot? Eh.... Err Yeah - Go on Suity you go girl!!!!

[Churchill]

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ......
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ......
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ......
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ......

Eh Wot? Eh.... Err Yeah - Go on Suity you go girl!!!!

I can just imagine Suity storming in to see senior management, smashing his fist on the table, shouting "We need to be more agile about this!" and promptly pissing all over the floor!

[Churchill]

This sort of thing?

The Prisoner TV Show Opening Theme 1967 - 1968 - YouTube

I'm sure that's the way he sees it happening in his own mind, yes.