In a realistic world, total freedom is not possible without financial freedom. Below are the links to some stimulating insight into the subject which troubles most of us blue and white collared employees.
Part 1 : Is Your Job Running Your Life?
Part 2 : Four Rookie Mistakes People Make That Keep Them Poor.
Part 3 : Five Steps I Took That Helped Me Become Financially Independent.
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Thursday, July 17, 2008
the text book strategy...
It's been long. I could not understand what to write. When mind is so obsessed with thoughts NOT related to work, then nothing can inspire to write about work. Today, somehow I have shrugged away all laziness and insecurity to try to discuss the basic "don't" of the IT industry which everyone knows at finger tips but still does not follow when it comes to it.
Here is a real life example of a project during its definition phase when the manager from client side asks the manager from vendor's side: "...I would like to know how you will mitigate against the risk of getting to mid August for the start of development and delay to development completion." And the manager (vendor) had this idea in mind - "We will put more resources (people) in case we see project getting delayed."
True story and a typical text book situation.
First of all, if the definition of the project has been done with earnest thought and sensible facts, then such questions MUST not arise. Goal of definition is to understand the need, scope in the possibilities, scope out the undoable tasks and estimate the design. Definition gives a foundation for the start of development.
That does not mean that post-definition the risks are not present. There are known risks for which already there should be a plan in place. Also, there are (sometimes) unkown risks, which arise during the later stages, for which mitigation plans have to be improvised using experience.
But here, the question is - in case the project is getting delayed can adding more resources (people) to it accelarate the progress of the project? Text books always say 'negative'. But I think, it cannot be generalized for every situation. In some cases, it might work depending upon what is delaying the project and which area of the project will be supported by the newly added enforcement. The strategists and leaders have huge responsibility for the success of it in any case.
Here is a real life example of a project during its definition phase when the manager from client side asks the manager from vendor's side: "...I would like to know how you will mitigate against the risk of getting to mid August for the start of development and delay to development completion." And the manager (vendor) had this idea in mind - "We will put more resources (people) in case we see project getting delayed."
True story and a typical text book situation.
First of all, if the definition of the project has been done with earnest thought and sensible facts, then such questions MUST not arise. Goal of definition is to understand the need, scope in the possibilities, scope out the undoable tasks and estimate the design. Definition gives a foundation for the start of development.That does not mean that post-definition the risks are not present. There are known risks for which already there should be a plan in place. Also, there are (sometimes) unkown risks, which arise during the later stages, for which mitigation plans have to be improvised using experience.
But here, the question is - in case the project is getting delayed can adding more resources (people) to it accelarate the progress of the project? Text books always say 'negative'. But I think, it cannot be generalized for every situation. In some cases, it might work depending upon what is delaying the project and which area of the project will be supported by the newly added enforcement. The strategists and leaders have huge responsibility for the success of it in any case.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
