One of the places I used to work is just about ready to go belly up. I'd always hoped when the economy turned itself around, I could go back there (and I'm still cheer leading for it to succeed). The company treated its people as they wished to be treated and attracted really smart and sharing people. Seriously. They did. That bred a LOT of loyalty in me and I'm sure a lot of the others that have had to leave over the last few months.
I'm not really sure what the business model was. The executives never invited me into the discussions.
But it appeared to me the company was selling itself by differentiating itself from the rest of the boutique development firms based on two things:
A couple of years ago, I'd have told you that was enough- nobody was doing either. None of the contracting firms I knew about anyway. A few if them would call in a design firm for the "look and feel stuff," but none of us hardy Development Men (strains of Stout Hearted Men should be starting up in your mind right now) really cared much. That was for sissies.
It was really bad for us to think that way, especially with some of the interfaces we came up with. Ugly. Counterproductive. Silly.
But soon, both terms became buzzwords and the economy crapped out. Bad thing, these buzzwords. I remember a manager got his job by spouting buzzwords at about four buzzwords per sentence in his interview- and he got the job. Since I was the guy that had to do all the stuff he talked about in his interview, I quickly learned he knew nothing. I didn't resent it, part of anyone's job is to make your boss look great to his/her boss. I just realized that buzzwords mean nothing.
Today, everybody says they're Agile and say they use appropriate UxD (User Experience Design) standards. And it ain't true.
They don't use Information Architects who create work flows (they call 'em scenarios, whatever) and design for the end user with the latest HMI Design Standards...that's Human-Machine Interface Design. Nor do they test GUIs (Graphical User Interfaces) and ask end users how well something works or doesn't work.
And they've never read the Agile Manifesto, else why is the Project Manager (PM) running the show without any input from team members? Or no test-driven development? Or no parallel programming? Or keeping documentation to a minimum and letting the team run itself with the PM's role changed to removing obstacles (with the BA, of course). Nope. Not Agile. They put silk purses on sows' ears.
So when the company I worked at was trying to drum up business, it got lost in the shuffle because its perceived expertise was allegedly shared by every other company. There was no differentiation.
Frankly, companies pulling in development consultants:
And some clients are necessarily Waterfall organizations. I worked at one retailer on an application that touched everything in the building and all of the stores. Neither my company nor the customer had a clue about what Agile is or is not. They created a 'War Room' where a lot of IT people sat, but they required Use Cases and High Fidelity Wireframes- I mean, I was using VISIO and PhotoShop to create wire frames. I was told we were using 'Modified Agile." Right. All Agile projects use modified and pragmatic methods. Neither company knew how to scale an Agile Project with Iterative/Waterfall components. So the whole thing blew up in my company's face after it moved back to Waterfall with some minor iterative design work.
Add the distinct lack of domain knowledge for vertical markets (we do Health Care, no- we do hosting, no- we do education, no-we do UxD, etc. etc.) forced the BAs, IAs and Developers to learn new domains for every project. Domain knowledge is the stuff you'd know if you worked five or more years in Insurance or Bakery Goods. It's the business, its regulations/regulators and very basic requirements. For example, I have a lot of domain knowledge about IT, software development, journalism (electronic and paper) and direct marketing (I've worked two projects in that area). The company I'm rooting for is about ready to go belly up because its pretty much bidding on anything that came in the door and has been doing that for several months.
Instead of concentrating on customer's needs and wants then specializing in a particular area, my former company blew it. I hope they get a contract soon so the business won't fold and it could rehire a lot of us.
But I'm not holding my breath.
I'm not really sure what the business model was. The executives never invited me into the discussions.
But it appeared to me the company was selling itself by differentiating itself from the rest of the boutique development firms based on two things:
- User Experience Design and Testing
- Agile Development Methods
A couple of years ago, I'd have told you that was enough- nobody was doing either. None of the contracting firms I knew about anyway. A few if them would call in a design firm for the "look and feel stuff," but none of us hardy Development Men (strains of Stout Hearted Men should be starting up in your mind right now) really cared much. That was for sissies.
It was really bad for us to think that way, especially with some of the interfaces we came up with. Ugly. Counterproductive. Silly.
But soon, both terms became buzzwords and the economy crapped out. Bad thing, these buzzwords. I remember a manager got his job by spouting buzzwords at about four buzzwords per sentence in his interview- and he got the job. Since I was the guy that had to do all the stuff he talked about in his interview, I quickly learned he knew nothing. I didn't resent it, part of anyone's job is to make your boss look great to his/her boss. I just realized that buzzwords mean nothing.
Today, everybody says they're Agile and say they use appropriate UxD (User Experience Design) standards. And it ain't true.
They don't use Information Architects who create work flows (they call 'em scenarios, whatever) and design for the end user with the latest HMI Design Standards...that's Human-Machine Interface Design. Nor do they test GUIs (Graphical User Interfaces) and ask end users how well something works or doesn't work.
And they've never read the Agile Manifesto, else why is the Project Manager (PM) running the show without any input from team members? Or no test-driven development? Or no parallel programming? Or keeping documentation to a minimum and letting the team run itself with the PM's role changed to removing obstacles (with the BA, of course). Nope. Not Agile. They put silk purses on sows' ears.
So when the company I worked at was trying to drum up business, it got lost in the shuffle because its perceived expertise was allegedly shared by every other company. There was no differentiation.
Frankly, companies pulling in development consultants:
- Don't care about methodologies. They care about results. And its way too easy to oversell Agile's working code paradigm.
- Don't care about the end user much. If they did, they'd have mastered this years ago. The Mac has been out how many years? They should care, because ease of use significantly increases productivity which translates to dollars and cents....but when my former company 'educated' potential clients, we had little impact because of the lack of front-end buy-in. Just do it and write the cost into the bid.
- Want the consultants to have the answers. The customer, allegedly, don't have time to supply a team member with enough clout to actually make iteration decisions nor provide a great deal of time as Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) to the BA/Developers...they have to do their jobs you know.
And some clients are necessarily Waterfall organizations. I worked at one retailer on an application that touched everything in the building and all of the stores. Neither my company nor the customer had a clue about what Agile is or is not. They created a 'War Room' where a lot of IT people sat, but they required Use Cases and High Fidelity Wireframes- I mean, I was using VISIO and PhotoShop to create wire frames. I was told we were using 'Modified Agile." Right. All Agile projects use modified and pragmatic methods. Neither company knew how to scale an Agile Project with Iterative/Waterfall components. So the whole thing blew up in my company's face after it moved back to Waterfall with some minor iterative design work.
Add the distinct lack of domain knowledge for vertical markets (we do Health Care, no- we do hosting, no- we do education, no-we do UxD, etc. etc.) forced the BAs, IAs and Developers to learn new domains for every project. Domain knowledge is the stuff you'd know if you worked five or more years in Insurance or Bakery Goods. It's the business, its regulations/regulators and very basic requirements. For example, I have a lot of domain knowledge about IT, software development, journalism (electronic and paper) and direct marketing (I've worked two projects in that area). The company I'm rooting for is about ready to go belly up because its pretty much bidding on anything that came in the door and has been doing that for several months.
Instead of concentrating on customer's needs and wants then specializing in a particular area, my former company blew it. I hope they get a contract soon so the business won't fold and it could rehire a lot of us.
But I'm not holding my breath.
Powered by ScribeFire.
Posts
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the point here is take baby steps first, or better yet see a need fill a need. Build confidence in what you are trying to sell almost prototype the product/service and remember the evolution of man (positive change)
ReplyDeleteThe whole point of using buzzwords is convience, and a shared understanding (supposely). Do they they make things easier or just cause more confusing? It really just depend on who you are talking to.
Btw, its great to hear you have loyality and that you are pulling for them. So are alot of other people as well for other reasons.
Besides no one ever wants to be on the losing side or associated with a failure, and don't get me wrong there are lesson learn in every step we take. So lets take a moment of silence to reflect. Hmmmmm.
But second, third, fourth or out ain't fun either.
g'day
ReplyDeletethis seems the essence of all recent development, be it software, or cars, or whatever - (over)selling buzzwords and technologies, and not the actual thing. An user would not care if its XYZ inside the box, or green gremlins, or black magic, as long as the box does what it is supposed to do.
ditto for the "bidding on anything that came in the door" - that would be a sign of just survival in low-profile-economy... which has to be overgrown once the status stabilizes. But then that means growing up...
Hi Anonymous,
ReplyDelete1. After more than a dozen years on the scene, methinks baby steps should be adolescent steps. I'm suggesting what then Governor Bob Kerrey told the University of Nebraska- shut down the Pharmacy School- don't do what you're not good at. Kerrey is a graduate of that program. Instead, figure out what you DO do well and concentrate your resources there. I've only worked at a couple of places that understood that philosophy (I mean after I got out of radio- that industry demands this sort of thinking). Both of those companies have weathered the last two high tech disasters (the NASDAQ crash and the current depression).
2. For buzzwords, yes, I agree. However, even aside from the differences in how you view the word and how I view the word...have you ever tried to re-explain something to outsourced developers? Outsourcing doesn't work- I've seen the concept fail too many times....and the times it DID work required a massive Project Management effort.
Example:
There are at least two types of definitions for every word: Denotative: the dictionary version and the Connotative: How the word affects your audience. In the United States, the technical use of the word 'host' implies either a computer or a data store of some type. In Europe, 'host' is a synonym for 'node.' Those are the connotative meanings. The technical dictionary I use says both are correct.
Yes, I'm pulling for them because they are a great bunch of people and were consistently forced to do a gazillion things all at once. Even as the management 'grew' the company, it still felt like a start-up. Which was cool in a lot of aspects, bit not so cool in others.
Hi Svilen,
ReplyDeleteNo argument from me. Except I think the company bid on anything that came in the door even in good times. I can't say for sure that was true, but I know the company tried to 'specialize' in UxD, Agile, Financial, Education, Media, electrical power... you get the picture. Any and all past project domains were considered 'specialties.'
Some of them we got, most we didn't. And we lost a couple of very big fish- one was our fault, the other was the client's financial downfall. This is why I had to leave. They moved the BA duties to the Project Managers...like they didn't have enough to do.