I recently heard an interview with Kent Alstad in which he commented something to this effect: "If a change in scope is proposed for a project, ask yourself this: will the project succeed if we do NOT do this? If the answer is yes, don't do it."
That's about as clean a way to judge whether to give in when scope begins to creep (as it always does) as I've ever heard. The fixed price guys need to mind this. The agile guys will have a nice counter to the whole premise of scope, I'm sure.
17 July 2006
05 July 2006
Design Debt
This book describes this concept. You create design debt when you crank out a solution without regard to its design simply to meet a deadline. It works and is "done," but at some point in the future if the system lives on, you're going to be compelled to clean it up, i.e., pay the debt down. And it may not be on your terms when that time comes.
If the overall benefit is greater than the cost, you're winning. If not, what are you thinking?
If the overall benefit is greater than the cost, you're winning. If not, what are you thinking?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)