Technical People vs. Business People September 11, 2008Posted by Jeremy in Business Solutions, Development Process.
Tags: Analysis, Business Process, Business Solutions, Development Process, Solution Architect
add a comment
I have heard and seen so many stories that say “the IS department at our company can never get anything done” or “the users don’t know what they need”. It is at epidemic stage at many businesses. At many companies it is an us vs. them idea. This is extremely sad due to the promise that technology can hold for optimizing the work and business environment.
Why does this happen? I would say the biggest reasons are: communication, time, and understanding. Those three items are a triangle. In many businesses the timeline is set long before anyone spends any time fully outlining the problem. So by the time that the business unit and IT get together they are already behind the “eight-ball”. So they limit the communications to a few meetings to describe what the business is looking for. Many times the business unit doesn’t have the time or the training to create specifications so they leave that to the IT staff. The IT staff doesn’t have the business training to fully understand what they are being told and what the business unit is trying to do. So by intermixing lack of time, lack of communication, and lack of understanding the specifications are not complete and quite possibly not correct. Since the business unit does not completely understand specifications they may think that it is complete and correct.
Once into the project, the business users are now able to see what is coming together and find that it is not what they need or requested. At this point, there are discussions of what needs to be changed.
When that happens, there are two routes that are usually pursued. First, the technical people will have a problem with the change because their solution is “to spec” meaning that it meets the written specifications. This causes there to be discussions of the specifications being incorrect and many times finger-pointing ensues. The second possibility is that somebody will just say “fine, we’ll change it” without altering the specifications or understanding the complete scope of the change. In this scenario, many times changes start to be made without control which causes more issues and more fixes. This can turn into the “black hole” project.
So what do we do?
Both sides of the equation need to understand that there is a knowledge gap. The business unit will not typically understand what the technical people are asking/meaning because they are not trained how to develop solutions or even how to do analysis. The IT staff will not typically understand what the business is asking for and why they are asking for it. You really need to have one or more people that really understand both sides of the game. There are a few solutions that I can think of
In some cases, the solution is a business analyst. This is a good solution as long as the person understands both sides. This is a good solution as long as they can understand both sides. This can be difficult because if you bring an outside analyst who understands analysis they may not understand the business or IT. If you use and internal business user who really understands the business may have a tough time communicating it to technical people and may not understand how to do the analysis. If you use a technical person, some of them may not be good with the business and/or analysis.
Education of resources
Some companies will have both sets of resources to spend time with each other to understand what each other does. They may also spend the time and money to help both sides understand how to do analysis. The developers will spend time learning how the business runs and the business will spend time learning how the systems will operate. This can be a great solution. It can also be time and money intensive.
This is the term that I use for someone who has the education and ability to do analysis, design and development of the system. The advantage to someone like this is that they have the ability to work with the business users to do the analysis. The same person has the ability to architect and design the solution that will solve the problem. They may even be involved in the development effort. The advantage you get with someone like this is that less will get lost in translation. The only thing that the solution architect will need to do is spend time to learn the business process. This can be done by having that person spend time with business users or maybe even train and allow them to do the job. This is a process called shadowing.
In many cases, the solution architect has the ability, knowledge, and experience that comes with doing this process many times so they know what they are looking for and really how to learn from what they are watching. They then will have the ability to analyze and document the process. From that they would come up with a proposed solution and design and architect it. This will allow the developers to understand what is being built from a technical aspect. This allows one person to translate between business and technical people.
As I said, it is sad to me that so many IT projects have issues due to timelines, miscommunication, and misunderstandings. If companies and people will begin to put people in place that can be the “translator” between business and technical jargon, I think more companies will realize the vast improvements that technology can bring. It really shouldn’t be “us vs. them” it should be “how do we solve this issue?”. Honestly, in some cases they speak different languages so in turn they need a “translator”.
Build vs. Buy Revisited July 11, 2008Posted by Jeremy in Development Process.
Tags: build, buy, development, Development Process, Refocus, software
1 comment so far
I wrote the original version of “Build vs. Buy” some time ago and realized that I it needed some work after rereadng it.
I believe that the information that I provided for purchasing a solution still holds true. Much of the problem with purchasing a solution revolves around the fact that in many cases you will need to mold your business to fit the software.
Now, I will qualify that there are definitely solutions out there that can be customized to meet your needs by the software company. In this scenario you will need to work with the vendor to find out the customization capabilities of the software. At this point it becomes much more like outsourced build.
This method is still a viable option but I believe that it takes a significant investment in order to successfully acheive the desired results. There are actually a few problems that will arise (on top of the previous list):
Lack of internal resources
Many businesses simply do not have internal resources to be able to handle the life cycle of a new development project. In many cases, they also may not have the resources to help them determine what resources they need. In is a catch-22 situation. In order to staff a new development project you really need someone who has experience in new development projects. It can also be quite difficult to find the people with the right skillsets with out someone to validate that they actually have the skillsets. This can be a very difficult situation and it gets many companies into trouble.
Lack of internal process
For many businesses who have not done new development or it has been a long time, they do not have processes in places to work through the development lifecycle. This takes considerable effort and thought to implement. Although many businesses choose not to do it, it is extremely important. Without the proper process in place to do analysis, design, development, and testing the project can be drastically delayed if not fail.
Lack of IT Resources
In today’s IT market, it can be very difficult to find the resources that you need to complete a development project. In many areas of the United States there are IT shortages. This means that although you have good intentions of hiring a senior level developer to help, you may have a difficult time filling that position (either as a full-time employee or even a contractor).
Cost of IT Resources
Because of the demand for IT resources, the cost to get good resources is definitely on the rise. Based on estimates, that is not going to change in the foreseeable future.
Based on the reasons above in the internal build, I personally believe that outsourced development is going to continue to grow.
**Please understand outsourced development and offshore development can be different things. Outsourced simply means someone else is doing it, preferrably a software consulting business. It can be either domestic or overseas.
Ability to retain skilled resources
An advantage that outsourced companies have is that all they do is develop software so in many cases can afford to keep more skilled, experienced, and expensive people on staff. For many businesses, the price to retain those resources is simply too much. On the other hand, if they can pay the firm to use the resources and build the solution and then they are done, it can be a viable option.
In most cases experienced, skilled resources can also deliver the project in a shorter timeframe with less time required for testing and rework. This is because the resources involved have typically completed many projects before and they have worked out their process.
Another advantage that outsourced build companies can have is the use of reusable components. Because they are writing software all the time, they are running into a lot of scenarios where they can build components that can be reused. Examples may include: data access components, logging components, document management, etc. This will typically reduce the expense and timeframe of a project because they are pre-developed and pre-tested.
This post definitely came off sounded biased toward the outsourced development option and quite honestly I think it is for a good reason. I think in many cases outsourced development shops are better positioned with resources, experience, and their development processes to complete projects more efficiently than many businesses are. This is mainly because most businesses are not development shops. It is not their focus. It is no different that outsourcing your printing, marketing, cleaning, lawn care, or whatever. In most cases the companies that focus on a specific task can acheive the desired result cheaper, faster, and easier. This is simply due to having the necessary resources and the necessary experience.
I hope that helps.