Getting control of a wayward project 2

[peteij]

I have been working on a project for some time (3 years) as an analyst. Just at the point where we were due to release the product we were taken over and it was effectively left to rot.

The Product Manager left, then we went through a management buyout. The product was resurected and I was handed the responibility to get it back on track. Since I have no previous experience in development, other than this project, it seems like an excellent opportunity to learn.

However, things are never that simple. Here are a few reasons why:

We develop this in partnership with an Indian company who provide the programmers.

1. 4 months into the new version, we still don't have a team, just one programmer. He doesn't have enough time to program, research, recruit, etc.
2. We are 2 months behind, when the initial scope was just a few bug fixes and functional fixes to get something acceptablke to the market place (we've lost a year on our competitors with all the politics). It requires about a month of development with 4 people.
3. The previous development team wrote a lot of the documentation. It is basically inconsistent and not maintainable, but rewriting it would be a massive task. I am having to patch documents or write additional documents that assume prior knowledge.
4. They are still very wary of the relationship because of the way they were treated by our then parent company. It has suddenly dawned on me that the contractual negotiations may not have included the full scope that I defined - therefore some of the things that I consider essential to make the product commercially viable may cost us extra (I wasn't involved in the legal stuff).
5. There is some debate about whether all bug fixing is within the scope, they want to exclude some bugs.

Prior to this project I had no development experience and I have no relevant qualifications or the time to do anything about it. This should be an excellent learning opportunity, but is beginning to become overwhelming.

I've got some stuff nailed down (testing, marketing) and I'm looking to implement threaded discussions to prevent information being held by one or two people, but after that I am lost.

I need ideas to get on track, e.g. keep my bosses happy, regain the trust of our partners, get them working at an acceptable speed, without compromising quality.

I think I have a good understanding of processes now, even if I don't have all the technical terms, but since I can't start from scratch I am hamstrung.

Help!...

 

[LesleyW]

Not a project manager myself, more of a programmer/analyst/technical lead person, but I have to manage my part of the project so understand **some** of the issues you face.

I see two things you need to focus on -

1) From what you say, one programmer is not enough resource. Focus on getting the 3 more you need. I am confused why you talk about recruitment - doesn't the Indian company supply programmers? Probably this doesn't work like I imagine, where you have a pile of resources you can go to when you need them.

2) This is a personal difficulty for me, coming from a programmng background. We programmers have a desire for order, for completeness. However the business cares about profit. Talk over with your bosses (or whoever ultimately gains from this project) about what is REALLY needed. Of course they may not understand all the issues, but if you do your best to make them see the implications of their actions and they still insist they don't need something that you think they do, its their heads on the line as it is their decision.

It's good to care about what you do, but if you think you're on a collision course to disaster, remind yourself "well I still get paid anyway"... sounds blase but if you lose your job you will find another (though it's not fun in the short term).

 

[peteij]

The Indian company do supply people, but they are at saturation point. They seem reluctant to get more programmers in until they are sure of the scope (some sense in that), but they have had the documents to base this on for a couple of months.

I ask daily about progress on this and they have only just quoted the scope thing. The funny thing is we used to have 14 developers and now I'm asking for 4 and keeping the scope to the bare essentials.

My bosses have generally been pretty supportive, I think in part because I have been realistic and honest about exepectations, but if it comes to parting with hard cash...

I think there is a lot of ground to gain with our partners, but if we don't start ticking over soon then I think my bosses will begain to lose faith. Previously we had a pretty open ended deadline which went from 4 months (unrealistic) to 1 year, to 18 months, to 2 years.

Also there are short term projects between the two companies and I think we are losing out to these.

I guess what it really boils down to is that there are business arrangements at a level I am not involved in (nor do I want to be). I want to appear to be proactive and not go running to my bosses every five minutes, but I think that they would have more sway in sorting this out.

I don't want to cut the scope, but if it came down to it I could divide work into that essential to get the product on the market and those essential to get a good product on the market.

 

[tanderso]

Have you considered local help? Sincerely,

Tom Anderson
Order amid Chaos, Inc.

http://www.oac-design.com

 

[Reebo99]

The best way to approach your bosses is with options. If you go to them will problems they will be less inclined to help.
Present the issues and a number of solutions, with pros and cons for each solution (normally costs). Also, provide some kind of forward projection document, showing how long the project is going to take based on the available resource. Then add more resources, at additional cost, and show the time saving for project completion. Usually the people who hold the cash will respond better if you state exactly what the benefits are, but keep it high level, I don't know of any senior managers who are interested in details.
I have used this approach successfully a number of times. Reebo
Scotland (snowed in)

 

[peteij]

Thanks for the input. We are tied into our partners because of the history of the project.

The problems stem back to recent contractual agreements that I wasn't involved in and still seam unclear. I need to get all these points resolved, get the team functioning so that any other problems can be dealt with (and there are a good few besides).

My inclination is that I am not in a position to resolve these issues, my boss is (he's the MD by the way). Then I can get on with the job I am supposed to be doing. Does this sound like I am passing the buck?

 

[tanderso]

If you don't have the authority to do what is necessary to get the project on track (contracts, purchases, etc), then you have no choice but to "pass the buck". You either need the resources or you need the authority. Sincerely,

Tom Anderson
Order amid Chaos, Inc.

http://www.oac-design.com

 

[peteij]

I was beginning to get around to that way of thinking, e.g. I either need to know everything about the contract so that I can deal with it effectively, or I ask my MD to pursue it. That way I have an 'either/or' option to present to him and the choice is his.

I've been working on the relationship with my one developer, balancing any criticisms with praise for good work done, so I am hoping that will yield some results.

I've been thinking about ways to improve communication - which I'm sure is the reason for things getting out of hand. Threaded discussions rather than 'death by Outlook', conferencing software, things like that.

Does this sound like the right way to go?

 

[tanderso]

Sounds like the right tack to me. If you're supposed to be in charge of and accountable for this project, you need to step up and exact the means to do so. If not, you'll likely be blamed for its failure. Be careful about presenting ultimatums, but let your boss know what can and cannot be accomplished dependent upon the resources or authority he provides. You previously mentioned confusion about the scope of the project... perhaps you can write up formal documents describing features that can be successfully employed in the given time frame for multiple scenarios of the different number of programmers and amount of control you have. This way at least you'll have formal written notice that certain features will not be achievable, so you won't be accountable if the project goes sour as a result. Combine some elements of a business plan with your detailed technical specification, and treat your boss like an investor you must woo into supporting your project. Treating it in terms of ROI (return on investment), etc., may appeal more to those that hold the green. Sincerely,

Tom Anderson
Order amid Chaos, Inc.

http://www.oac-design.com

 

[peteij]

Some interesting points. I originally had every thing in the prosal then full spec approved by my boss, but I'm not sure that the partner agreement was based on those documents.

The multiple scenarios would work if there is a gap between what I perceive as the scope and what was agreed. I think because I took the right approach in the first place and named stakeholders and their responsibilities I am on safe ground as long as I don't appear to be letting things drift - which I guess is what's bothering me.

I'm learning the business part of it as I go, so maybe I'm stumbling into issues rather than pre-empting them.