 | |
|
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