Developing software for corporates- the necessary obfuscation layer

[aussielong]

As the idiot with gannt chart I tend to produce a highly detailed development plan at the beginning of all projects. That is reviewed and agreed with the lead developers and then signed off by the business. This allows me to manage expectations of the client and keep track of the developers. It also allows the identification of issues, time delays and priorisation of scope should we have issues coupled with the ability to line up resources for subsequent phases.

I tick off progress based on key areas both sequential and parallel. The detail is to ensure the developers know what were doing. To be fair though, everything I've had developed in the last few years I've offshored and this 'micro manage' approach ensures I get delivered what we agreed.

Do you work on small projects that have very clear requirements?

How can you possibly plan everything up front and offshore dev otherwise?

Or are your devs working from a different plan to you?

[minestrone]

I have on my desk a 96 page 'agile playbook' which describes client co's lightweight process which we all have to follow.

I honestly have no energy now to attempt to critique this tulipe, I just follow along with the madness.

[MarillionFan]

Do you work on small projects that have very clear requirements?

How can you possibly plan everything up front and offshore dev otherwise?

Or are your devs working from a different plan to you?

Business Intelligence is a little more predictable.

[Lockhouse]

My entire IT career has been based on expectation mangement.

[VectraMan]

I like to ignore the process and get on with the work. Inevitably this causes some friction, but you have some time. PMs by definition don't work very hard and don't understand what the people they take credit for are actually doing, so you have a few weeks before anybody will realise you're not working in the way you're meant to be. And then it'll be a murmur, a few emails, a few reminders. Keep ignoring the process and the murmurs will get louder, with the inevitable conclusion that the more senior management get involved and you get fired.

So the challenge is to finish the work before that point. Then the senior management are delighted with you and when the PM comes along telling him you should be fired for not doing work, he's rightly exposed as the entirely useless waste of money and space that he is.

[minestrone]

one of the keys is when the project manager realises he is not the boss, but the enabler, the oil between the wheels, the servant.

The best PM I ever worked for got the team together at some point in the morning, no fixed time in the calendar to make him look as if he was busy, just "quick 2 min catch up".

He would ask you what you were working on and then say stuff like...

"is there anything I can do to keep you productive?" "any issues with any other teams?" "I can chase that down for you" "I will deal with that for you"

He basically viewed himself as a path clearer for work to be done. Unique and refreshing.

[doodab]

"I can chase that down for you" "I will deal with that for you"

He basically viewed himself as a path clearer for work to be done. Unique and refreshing.

Whereas the bad ones like to delegate every random piece of tulip they can to you.

[suityou01]

Strong opinions

I have some strong opinions on this one. Every company is different. Processes differ, but in all cases there is a process. It is undeniable. I fully understand creative types don't like doctrine and I have worked in a lot of tulipe places where managers pomp about arranging pointless meetings and get all shouty when the don't like what they hear. I've also seen the other side of the coin where hands off management is killing a project also, I believe there was a thread on here recently from NWPTC about how soul destroying that is.

Without process there is chaos. The level of process a team needs for optimum performance is subjective, and is generally based on the quality, or indeed competency of said team. Extreme examples include local government, who generally employ low grade staff and layer on the red tape. Or the trade union mentality. Or off-shore teams needing micromanaging. Thick with process, inefficient.

For those who understand these things, it's like we need some power factor correction between the stuff doers and the management. With unity power factor being the holy grail. For those that don't understand PFC, it's essentially a way of getting the most efficient work out of an electrical device. If you have a factory with lots of electrical motors then due to the nature of the motors, they actually impede the flow of electricity because they have lots of windings, and this causes a lag. This lag causes overheating and this heat that is lost is energy that could have been spent doing work. [Very oversimplified explanation of PFC].

Or a bit like when I was in swimming classes, you get your stroke wrong and you make lots of foam but don't get much movement. Get it right and you are putting in lots of laps.

So for me getting the process right is about how much process as well as what the process is.

What I didn't want to see in this thread was the petulant rantings of the self obsessed "creative types" carrying on as if those who hired them have no right to formulate how they keep tabs on where there money goes.

[fullyautomatix]

I have some strong opinions on this one. Every company is different. Processes differ, but in all cases there is a process. It is undeniable. I fully understand creative types don't like doctrine and I have worked in a lot of tulipe places where managers pomp about arranging pointless meetings and get all shouty when the don't like what they hear. I've also seen the other side of the coin where hands off management is killing a project also, I believe there was a thread on here recently from NWPTC about how soul destroying that is.

Without process there is chaos. The level of process a team needs for optimum performance is subjective, and is generally based on the quality, or indeed competency of said team. Extreme examples include local government, who generally employ low grade staff and layer on the red tape. Or the trade union mentality. Or off-shore teams needing micromanaging. Thick with process, inefficient.

For those who understand these things, it's like we need some power factor correction between the stuff doers and the management. With unity power factor being the holy grail. For those that don't understand PFC, it's essentially a way of getting the most efficient work out of an electrical device. If you have a factory with lots of electrical motors then due to the nature of the motors, they actually impede the flow of electricity because they have lots of windings, and this causes a lag. This lag causes overheating and this heat that is lost is energy that could have been spent doing work. [Very oversimplified explanation of PFC].

Or a bit like when I was in swimming classes, you get your stroke wrong and you make lots of foam but don't get much movement. Get it right and you are putting in lots of laps.

So for me getting the process right is about how much process as well as what the process is.

What I didn't want to see in this thread was the petulant rantings of the self obsessed "creative types" carrying on as if those who hired them have no right to formulate how they keep tabs on where there money goes.

What Suity said.

(although I have no clue what all that bollox he has written means)

[minestrone]

I have some strong opinions on this one. Every company is different. Processes differ, but in all cases there is a process. It is undeniable. I fully understand creative types don't like doctrine and I have worked in a lot of tulipe places where managers pomp about arranging pointless meetings and get all shouty when the don't like what they hear. I've also seen the other side of the coin where hands off management is killing a project also, I believe there was a thread on here recently from NWPTC about how soul destroying that is.

Without process there is chaos. The level of process a team needs for optimum performance is subjective, and is generally based on the quality, or indeed competency of said team. Extreme examples include local government, who generally employ low grade staff and layer on the red tape. Or the trade union mentality. Or off-shore teams needing micromanaging. Thick with process, inefficient.

For those who understand these things, it's like we need some power factor correction between the stuff doers and the management. With unity power factor being the holy grail. For those that don't understand PFC, it's essentially a way of getting the most efficient work out of an electrical device. If you have a factory with lots of electrical motors then due to the nature of the motors, they actually impede the flow of electricity because they have lots of windings, and this causes a lag. This lag causes overheating and this heat that is lost is energy that could have been spent doing work. [Very oversimplified explanation of PFC].

Or a bit like when I was in swimming classes, you get your stroke wrong and you make lots of foam but don't get much movement. Get it right and you are putting in lots of laps.

So for me getting the process right is about how much process as well as what the process is.

What I didn't want to see in this thread was the petulant rantings of the self obsessed "creative types" carrying on as if those who hired them have no right to formulate how they keep tabs on where there money goes.

It is like a dilbert cartoon with no images and more words