Test report sent; now the fighting starts

Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

suityou01 replied

5 October 2010, 14:15
Originally posted by Mich the Tester View Post

Package implementation. Board chose the package according to GCTPM*, department didn't agree in the first place, wanted something else; design covered differences to standard functionality. Acceptant agreed to designs without understanding the standard functionality. Development team have covered all the designs, but acceptant is still upset about the package. And rightly so; there should now be lots of RFCs to test.

*Golf Course Technology Purchasing Methodology

What a shower.
Keeeeeeeeeeeep invoicing.
Leave a comment:
Mich the Tester replied

5 October 2010, 14:11
Originally posted by suityou01 View Post

Was it just gaps in the requirements or were the requirements misinterpreted?
Was this a waterfall SDLC?
Who gathered the requirements?

Package implementation. Board chose the package according to GCTPM*, department didn't agree in the first place, wanted something else; design covered differences to standard functionality. Acceptant agreed to designs without understanding the standard functionality. Development team have covered all the designs, but acceptant is still upset about the package. And rightly so; there should now be lots of RFCs to test.

*Golf Course Technology Purchasing Methodology
Leave a comment:
suityou01 replied

5 October 2010, 13:53
Originally posted by Mich the Tester View Post

Have sent test report to project manager and acceptant. Basically, the system does pretty much what the design says it should (which itself is a historic moment in the annals of systems development), but the acceptant won’t accept the system as he’s saying the design doesn’t address his business needs, despite having signed off on it. Project Manager rightly says he's delivered what was asked for and should now recieve praise from all around and sign-off.

I have suggested a compromise which should keep them occupied long enough for me and Project Manager and Program Manager to send some more invoices while they thank me for rescuing them all from a Catch-22 situation; Project Manager should cost and estimate all changes demanded by acceptant while acceptant writes business cases for each change required, assisted in doing so by me. F**king obvious really, but try explaining that to permies.

This could blow up in my face, or it could give me 2 more months invoicing.

Was it just gaps in the requirements or were the requirements misinterpreted?
Was this a waterfall SDLC?
Who gathered the requirements?
Leave a comment:
EternalOptimist replied

5 October 2010, 13:53
Originally posted by Mich the Tester View Post

Have sent test report to project manager and acceptant. Basically, the system does pretty much what the design says it should (which itself is a historic moment in the annals of systems development), but the acceptant won’t accept the system as he’s saying the design doesn’t address his business needs, despite having signed off on it. Project Manager rightly says he's delivered what was asked for and should now recieve praise from all around and sign-off.

I have suggested a compromise which should keep them occupied long enough for me and Project Manager and Program Manager to send some more invoices while they thank me for rescuing them all from a Catch-22 situation; Project Manager should cost and estimate all changes demanded by acceptant while acceptant writes business cases for each change required, assisted in doing so by me. F**king obvious really, but try explaining that to permies.

This could blow up in my face, or it could give me 2 more months invoicing.

Sounds like a win/win to me.
or even a win/win/win
Leave a comment:
Mich the Tester started a topic Test report sent; now the fighting starts

5 October 2010, 13:46
Test report sent; now the fighting starts

Have sent test report to project manager and acceptant. Basically, the system does pretty much what the design says it should (which itself is a historic moment in the annals of systems development), but the acceptant won’t accept the system as he’s saying the design doesn’t address his business needs, despite having signed off on it. Project Manager rightly says he's delivered what was asked for and should now recieve praise from all around and sign-off.

I have suggested a compromise which should keep them occupied long enough for me and Project Manager and Program Manager to send some more invoices while they thank me for rescuing them all from a Catch-22 situation; Project Manager should cost and estimate all changes demanded by acceptant while acceptant writes business cases for each change required, assisted in doing so by me. F**king obvious really, but try explaining that to permies.

This could blow up in my face, or it could give me 2 more months invoicing.
Tags: None