There are
many factors to blame for implementation process’ inefficiency, however many of
the factors can be associated with the complexity of the project itself,
respectively of the application(s) involved. The problem of complexity can be
addressed by either answering to complexity with complexity, building a complex
team to handle the tasks, which is seldom feasible even if many organizations
do it, respectively by simplifying the implementation process and/or the application.
In what
concerns the project, the complexity starts with requirement’s elicitation, the
iterative transformations they suffer until the final functional requirements document
is finalized, their evaluation and mapping to features, respectively gap’s
identification. It’s a complex task because it involves understanding the
business as well the functionality available in the target system(s). Then
comes the effort estimation, which, as the name suggests, is just a guess based
on available historical numbers and/or experts’ opinion. High-level requirements
are easier to manage than low-level requirements, however they allow for more
gaps in understanding. The more detailed the specifications, the more they
should help in the estimation process, though that’s the theory. A considerable
number of factors can impact the process.
Even if
there are standard activities in the implementation process, the number of
resources involved from the customer as well from the partner(s) side makes the
whole planning process a nightmare for any Project Manager, no matter how
experienced he/she is.
Ideally,
each member of the team should behave like a trooper, knowing by instinct when and
what needs to be done, which are the expectations, etc. This might be close to expectation
on the partner side as the resources more likely participated in similar
projects, though there’s always a mix between levels of expertise, resources migrating
between projects. Unfortunately, that’s seldom (never) the case on the customer
side as the gap between reality and expectation is considerable.
Each team
member requires a minimum of information/knowledge so he/she can perform the
activities assigned. Moreover, the volume of coordination and cooperation is
considerably higher than in other projects, complexity that increases with
organization’s size and is inverse proportional with organization’s maturity in
managing projects and implementation-related activities. There’s thus a minimum
of initial communication needed, and furthermore communication needs to occur
between the parties involved. Moreover, the higher the lack of cohesion between
the parties, the higher the need for communication and this applies especially
when multiple organizations are involved in the project.
The triple constraint
of Project Management between scope, cost, and time, respectively on quality has
an important impact on the project. Resources need to be available when the project
needs them and, especially on the partner side, only when they are needed. The
implementation project to be feasible for the partner, its resources must work
on several projects in parallel or the timing must be perfect, that no waiting
times are involved, respectively the effort is concentrated only when needed.
Such precision is possible maybe at project’s beginning, though the further the
project evolves, the more challenging becomes the coordination of resources. Similar
considerations apply to the customer as well.
Thus, a
more realistic expectation is to have resources available only at certain
points in time, and the resources should be capable of juggling between
projects, respectively between project and other activities. Prioritizing is a
must, and sometimes the operations or other projects have higher priority. When
the time is not available, resources need to compromise by reducing the level
of quality.
On the
other side, it would be great if most of the effort could be concentrated at
the beginning of the project, the later interactions being minimal.
No comments:
Post a Comment