|
The answers are too much "me vs. them". I prefer to work with my clients in a collaborative manner, rather than a confrontational one.
[soapbox] If this is the general attitude of developers and also of customers/clients, no wonder our industry is so f*** up. [/soapbox]
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Doesn't the third choice come close to what you are looking
Explain in detail why they are wrong, try hard to convince them, but agree with their final decision
isn't there a collaboration?
|
|
|
|
|
Yusuf wrote: isn't there a collaboration?
No, because in collaboration, while there can be an obvious "wrong", what people try to achieve is better, and one doesn't have to convince the other person, it's just obvious, nor is it "their" final decision, but a consensus.
In other words, it's not a war, it's a partnership!
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Equal Partnership = Equal Money.
If you are the suppler then there has to be a customer. If you are a partnership then you should both benefit from the product and have equal investment. Not a tradition client customer relationship.
Why is it when you are busy everyone whats it yesterday, But when your not no-one has any work for you?
|
|
|
|
|
Ben Daq wrote: If you are a partnership then you should both benefit from the product and have equal investment.
Ah, good point. While I was using the word "partnership" in a social context, the concept of "equal investment" can also been equality in time and money. There are different meanings to partnership, and I view any relationship between myself and my client as a partnership in terms of common goals, an expectation of equality in that I will be fairly compensated for the value that they receive, the ability to change agreements equitably, and so forth.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
but nothing beats good communication and written and approved documents concerning development/cost.
Watched code never compiles.
|
|
|
|
|
Maximilien wrote: nothing beats good communication and written and approved documents concerning development/cost.
Definitely Correct!! If everything is predefined and cleared to both parties then there are rare chances where these can occur also if something goes wrong both can have look in the approved things for sorting out any wrong things.
Believe Yourself™
|
|
|
|
|
Whenever I've been in this situation, I've learned to be extremely careful. The customer being 'wrong' may simply be due to a miscommunication. Sometimes I don't understand the explanation of what they want, and in others their explanation is poor, or uses terminology that I don't know.
The best way I've found to deal with this is honesty. Reiterate what they're asking in your own terms. Ask questions to make sure you understand what they want.
I've found that customers like to describe what they think are solutions, rather than the actual problem they are trying to solve. Unfortunately the solutions they describe may or may not solve the original problem.
If you are dealing with a large organization, see if you can't get multiple inputs on the problem. Occasionally I've been caught as a chess piece in organization politics.
Finally, if what they ask is illegal or immoral in some way (defrauding their customer), just walk away. Don't make yourself liable for their misdeeds, as it's not worth the risk.
|
|
|
|
|
I went for the last on because sometimes stupid and apparently wrong specs are actually correct seeing them by the eyes of the customer 
So unless something is completely against everything else is made on the application we (the ones that are working on the project) not always have access to the full knowledge required to decide what's wrong and what's right.
We have the right to say that a spec may be wrong based on our perception of the problem but the customer is the one with the final word and that's how it will be made.
|
|
|
|
|
I have a standing objection with my boss. I am regularly required to put in adjustment capability into a reporting app, now thats just wrong, fix the underlyng data is the correct solution. Problem is the vendor of the originating system can't/won't/$million fix the system so he gets his adjustments 
Point being the developer is NOT the arbitrator of the final design, there may be valid business reason for a decision.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
|
koolprasad2003 wrote: why organization here ?due to customer only...
oh really ? what about us ? If we don't exists, no customers. Beside it depends, if they are paying high, who cares about right or wrong...
TVMU^P[[IGIOQHG^JSH`A#@`RFJ\c^JPL>;"[,*/|+&WLEZGc`AFXc!L
%^]*IRXD#@GKCQ`R\^SF_WcHbORY87֦ʻ6ϣN8ȤBcRAV\Z^&SU~%CSWQ@#2
W_AD`EPABIKRDFVS)EVLQK)JKQUFK[M`UKs*$GwU#QDXBER@CBN%
R0~53%eYrd8mt^7Z6]iTF+(EWfJ9zaK-iTV.C\y<pjxsg-b$f4ia> -----------------------------------------------
128 bit encrypted signature, crack if you can
|
|
|
|
|
......never underestimate the power of the irate customer.
My signature "sucks" today
|
|
|
|
|
This one time... a client had a stupid feature request. So I put it off for as long as I could (about six months), hoping the client would see reason. He didn't, he saw only dollar signs and didn't mind cheating his customers. So I had to add the feature.
|
|
|
|
|
|
"at band camp?"
Damn! You beat me to it!
God is REAL unless declared int
|
|
|
|
|
Did the feature involve playing a trumpet via flatulence?
3x12=36
2x12=24
1x12=12
0x12=18
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
![Rose | [Rose]](https://codeproject.global.ssl.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/rose.gif)
