|
David Lane wrote: time was the biggest factor
Indeed. A while back, the company I work for brought in one of these 'touchy-feely' management consultants to find out why the engineers were so disgruntled. One of the complaints was that our schedules are dictated from above.
A typical schedule discussion goes something like this:
Management: "We need features X, Y, and Z by the end of Q1 next year. What's the schedule for that?"
Engineering: "Uhh..."
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
Sometimes it becomes necessary to add manpower to meet schedule. The project can come in on time (end date met) but be way over budget because of unplanned staffing.
|
|
|
|
|
In my last job they developed the project to a budget.
The time I worked on the job multiplied by my hourly rate was counted in the project cost. So, I was under pressure to finish quickly and it wasn't quite done to the quality that I would like.
There was free time at the end to improve my module, but they wouldn't let me because the extra time spent would bust the budget. And I had no other work to do once the project was finished. I'm a saleried worker, they pay me weither I'm working or just hanging out on the forums  .
Really smart project management
|
|
|
|
|
I think the following ( 1 is most important)
1. The design and implementation was first rate
2. The job is fully documented
3. The client / boss etc is happy (although some people never are)
4. The job is done within budget
5. The job is done on time (although, it will take as long as it takes to satisfy 1)
6. The job matches the initial specs perfectly (very rarely happens)
7. The job is done error-free (there has never been a project of any import which works on version 1.0.0.0)
|
|
|
|
|
How long have you been in the industry?
"3. The client / boss etc is happy" is number one. It shouldn't be but it is.
regards,
Paul Watson
Ireland & South Africa
Andy Brummer wrote: Watson's law:
As an online discussion of cars grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving the Bugatti Veyron approaches one.
|
|
|
|
|
'On Budget' should be higher surely if you want to make a living...
Apathy Rules - I suppose...
|
|
|
|
|
Client won't pay if they aren't happy 
And it depends how you charged. We never go on fixed price.
regards,
Paul Watson
Ireland & South Africa
Andy Brummer wrote: Watson's law:
As an online discussion of cars grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving the Bugatti Veyron approaches one.
|
|
|
|
|
Since you're developing iteratively (you are, aren't you), you're reviewing the project every 2-4 weeks. If the business call is that greater investment will bring sufficiently greater returns to justify it, or if by keeping to the budget you'll not actually have anything that customers will buy, or if you have to meet a deadline and missing it will nullify the project (think Olympics, for example) and you can pull it in by increasing investment, going over budget is fully justified.
It does, of course, need to be a calculated decision with the business case to back it up.
Ian Brockbank
"Legacy systems are systems that are not protected with a suite of tests. ... You are building legacy code every time you build software without associated tests." - Mary and Tom Poppendieck, Implementing Lean Software Development.
|
|
|
|
|
Paul Watson wrote: The client / boss etc is happy" is number one. It shouldn't be but it is.
Unless you're an academic researcher, you're developing software for a paying customer. If that customer isn't happy when the job is done, none of the other considerations matter. I don't see the problem with that being the primary consideration, especially since it encompasses the other entries.
Interestingly, all of the other items reflect the developer's esthetic regarding the job, his criteria for success. They can contribute to the 'customer being happy', since he may define his requirements in those terms. "I've got to have this by the end of the month", "I can only budget $20K for this effort", "I don't care how many features you give me, but what you do supply has to be rock-solid", and so on.
I think if more us spent more time on accurately identifying what the customer really needed and then meeting that need, the software industry would have a much better reputation. It's like the old joke: "You start coding; I'll go see what they want." 
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
Gary R. Wheeler wrote: I don't see the problem with that being the primary consideration
Because you can make a client happy with a badly architected system.
regards,
Paul Watson
Ireland & South Africa
Andy Brummer wrote: Watson's law:
As an online discussion of cars grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving the Bugatti Veyron approaches one.
|
|
|
|
|
Also often our clients are not the end users. Our clients often don't understand what the application's users need. So what suites our client may not suit the end user.
This is very true in web-development.
regards,
Paul Watson
Ireland & South Africa
Andy Brummer wrote: Watson's law:
As an online discussion of cars grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving the Bugatti Veyron approaches one.
|
|
|
|
|
I agree. If one's aim is to succeed at anything, making the client/boss happy is number one.
|
|
|
|
|
Because of "The client / boss etc is happy" I never have any time to think of the design or to document very much so my priorities are very different. I have to eliminate "The job is done within budget" because there is no real way to judge that for me.
1. The client / boss etc is happy
2. The job is done on time (this usually is a part of 1)
3. The job is done error-free
4. The design and implementation was first rate ( My skill and experience help here but there is 0 time allocated to the design phase )
5. The job is fully documented ( we need to remove the word "fully" as it never applies )
6. The job matches the initial specs perfectly ( this also is never done )
John
|
|
|
|
|
"I've got to go to the bathroom!"
Shohom67
|
|
|
|
|
In my personal opinion, I guess, it's depending up on each person’s view, which is involved with the project. In this case, every single point have to be rated as very important.
Regards,
Peter
|
|
|
|
|
I assumed the poll wanted me to rate the parameters in order of importance (i.e. 1 to 7). Looks like it meant "1 = very important, 5 = least important" or "1=not very important, 5 = extremely important". Which one is it?
The presentation of the poll could use some rework.
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
Yes.
One can legitimately consider these numbers as priorities so read them this way: "1 is my first priority and 5 is the least" (Unfortunately, different web sites consider different meanings which make things even more complicated.)
The first days that I registered to this web site articles had such a way of rating. I can remember that I gave a 1 to an article that I thought should has the top mark(compared to A+ and C-) Thanks to CP admins who changed that to Poor and Excellent.
What we see in this poll is either weak design or ignoring users feedbacks
// "Life is very short and is very fragile also." Yanni
while (I'm_alive)
{
cout<<"I love programming.";
}
|
|
|
|
|
Other way around. The description says "1 = not important, 5 = very important"
regards,
Paul Watson
Ireland & South Africa
Andy Brummer wrote: Watson's law:
As an online discussion of cars grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving the Bugatti Veyron approaches one.
|
|
|
|
|
ooo, reverse my answers.
Gary
|
|
|
|
|
I can't 
regards,
Paul Watson
Ireland & South Africa
Andy Brummer wrote: Watson's law:
As an online discussion of cars grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving the Bugatti Veyron approaches one.
|
|
|
|
|
Never mind. I did it right.
Gary
|
|
|
|
|
What to the 1 and the 5 mean?
Is 1 really yes or really no?
|
|
|
|
|
|
At first, I was somewhat surprised that "The boss/cloent is happy" isn't a runaway first place, by miles. Ok, only 42 answers so far, so maybe too early to tell, but to my mind, and the way I run my business, this is the only thing that really matters - the others are nice, and may indeed affect how happy the client is, but their satisfaction has to be the number one concern.
Then I realised I was thinking about my situatiom where I don't have a boss, only clients... and in their case, more than with a boss at work, there is another important aspect that isn't in the poll: "Good cummunication and relationship with the client" - as long as you have that, the other issues tend to take care of themselves.
But anyway, how happy your boss or your client is, will depend largely on the other points in the poll, and how important each of these is depends on the particular job, surely.
"A job well done" means different things to different people
- it also means different things on different jobs; some jobs may require a strict deadline, others not, for example. The boss/client and the job itself will (or should!) detemine what constitutes a "job well done" for each particular job, not you, the developer. In fact, the more I think about it, the more I think this is a totally pointless and useless poll!! Sorry...
Fred
|
|
|
|
|
All entries show the same number of votes(15 at the moment) while different percentages and chart!
// "Life is very short and is very fragile also." Yanni
while (I'm_alive)
{
cout<<"I love programming.";
}
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
