I've been thinking that the success/failure discussion is the wrong way to be looking at this.
I remember reading (Rodney Turner?) that when PM is applied projects are X% cheaper, faster etc than if no project management is applied, but that the increased efficiency had to be measured against the increased costs (i.e. you don't put a PM onto a minor system enhancement.)
So, rather than talk about failures what we should be talking about is relative improvements.
(Dan Strayer was the catalyst for writing this down.)
28 February 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Popular Posts
-
I have been having a bit of a discussion over at the IIBA blog with Kevin (VP BOK) and Julian (Chief architect.) It’s migrated over to ...
-
Due to popular demand I have aggregated some information on User Stories and created a simple template. If you feel this would be useful to...
-
Better Projects Templates I am uploading a couple of project document templates to Google Docs. As I add more I'll post them up here. You...
-
You've heard many reasons why project fail. Here is a discussion hosted by BCS on why projects work. The discussion covers four dimensio...
-
The Precedence Diagramming Method ( PDM ) was developed in the early 1960s by H.B. Zachry in cooperation with IBM. It has largely repla...
-
In the below video some of the #10yrsagile participants discuss the role of the Business Analyst. A question for you; Do you agree or di...
-
This is a guest post by Jeff Hobbs. Jeff is a project manager at ActiveState Software who provide pm and collaboration software. Email, ...
-
In one of the Carnivals of Business Analysts the theme was “ Requirements Analysis ." I searched the web far and wide and came up with a n...
-
The definition of a stakeholder is controversial. For example, project team members are generally not considered stakeholders, but in virtua...
-
I have written about the V-Model across several posts. The V model is a testing focused expansion of the software development lifecycle. In ...
0 comments:
Post a Comment