No clear direction/changing plans

[ManagerJay]

I am having a problem planning for the future IT needs since I cannot get a clear direction from the organization. Once I think we have a direction decided upon, it is changed by upper management.

When I started, none of the desktops, and 95% of the time the server did not work correctly. Now, all the desktop systems are working correctly and the server we have is up about 99% of the time.

After everything was running smoothly, I started working with an Assistanct Executive Director and we developed a 5 year technology plan. Since money is a major issue, and regional offices needed increased services (they currently access the server over a frame relay connection of 56K max) we discussed the possibilities and decided on a Linux solution. The reason behind this was two fold. First, I had older computers that could be used as servers without any problem. Second, the cost to the association was almost nothing. Third, it gave us the ability to move to pptp over the Internet when DSL, ADSL and cable modem became available in the areas where we have our local offices.

The technology plan was approved in October of last year with the stipulation I wait until March of this year to start implementation.

In January, the Executive Director I was working with accepted a position with another organization. At that time, the Executive Director was assigned as my supervisor. In our first meeting she told me the technology plan was not acceptable because it did not follow our parent organization's technology plan. I asked about increasing the level of service for the regional offices and I was told that was not a concern.

The other problem I am having is that I will be asked to do something and about time the project is complete, management will change what the outcome should have been. For example, I have implemented a VPN to provide home access to some of our users (some work strange hours). The project is complete and I am ready to make the annoucement that it is available for use. I have been asked to hold off on the announcement because they want to re-evaluate whether or not they want to allow employees access to the network when they are away from the office.

Have I just missed the boat here? Is this typical for most organizatins? Am I not asking the right questions? Or, what?

Thanks for your help.



Jay

 

[pivan]

Hi Jay:

Your organization sounds like a typical Fortune 500 Company . ...and change like this is typical (IMHO).

It sounds like you have done a great job so far.

Addison Wessliy, in their Object Oriented Series has a great book an "Managing Software Requirements", it is consistent with the Rational Unified Process. A good portion of this book deals with exactly what you are talking about, and that is managing changing requirements.

You might want to check it out.

'gLuck
Ivan In not now, when?
If not here, where?
If not us, who?

Just do it!!

 

[MasterRacker]

I agree with pivan, sounds like you're doing a great job. Unfortunately, what's happening to you is fairly typical from what I've heard. The "clueless executive" is all too common. Keep in mind that what goes on in Dilbert is all true! Scott Adams gets true stories in e-mail from all over and turns the best ones into comics. (I want his job!)

About all I can suggest is to do through risk/benefit analysis and ROI in hard $$ for any new things you want to implement. You can also try to show how you're following the 80/20 rule ("I'm only proposing to spend 20% of what I could spend, but solving 80% of the problems....blah, blah, blah&quot

<Cynical comment> If you can lay out the benefits in a way to make it clear to the execs how the changes will benefit them (not the company, but their own personal income) it will really help. </Cynical comment>

In the end, you can lead them to their dishes but you can't force them to eat.
Jeff
masterracker@hotmail.com

If everything seems to be going well: you don't have enough information.......

 

[MikeBarone]

I work for a very large automotive company and I feel your pain!

I was tossed around in this whirlwind for a couple years until it almost drove me nuts. I then did something that changed everything. I said NO, loudly and they all dropped their jaws and listened.

I was being told to start a third job before the frist two were even complete and this was never ending. Then they would complain that the first two jobs were not getting done.

I make it sound like I was able to change this with one comment and that is not exactly fact. I decided to implement a plan over a few months. It all evolved around project management software, Microsoft Project in my case.

I started tracking all the jobs and projecting times. When they asked me to start new projects I presented them with the project file and asked them what had to give in order to get the new job done. I empowered them to control when things were done, or so they thought anyway.

In a nutshell, I was able to get them to respect the amount of work that was involved by accurately portraying what was involved in the tasks. After a few times of sticking the project file in their faces they started to back off a bit and just ask me when it could be done. I don't have to rely on the project file as much as I used to but without it I would still be trying to stuff 10 pounds of manule in a 3 pound bag.

Hope this helps. » » » » » »
Mike Barone

http://www.cgiscript.net

FREE and Pro CGI/Perl Scripts

 

[ianmcgowan]

Perhaps you are being too ambitious? A 5 year technology plan? Really? 5 *years*?

I like what Mike says about saying &quot;no&quot;. I always have a full schedule, so I automatically say no to any project that needs to be done right now. If the user goes over my head, I insist that some other project be slipped to make up for the extra work. It sometimes works, too

The other helpful thing is to just go ahead and do what's right. This is probably how you got the desktops under control, and server uptime to 99% in the first place. Forget about ROI's and justifications to people that don't get what you're talking about anyway. Just do it. This can be risky - you're hoping that when the end of year review comes there's been enough visible improvement and so many people raving about what a difference you've made that firing you is politically inexpedient.

Better to flame out than fade away

I was miserable in a similar job for 4 years, then, ahem, flamed out in 18 months in the next job after trying to change everything, and I know which one was more fun.

 

[carp]

I had a similar experience to Mike's. While I never said 'No' (maybe a bad habit I picked up in the military), I just started presenting management with level of effort estimates, a catalogue of ongoing projects, and making them pick which project(s) wouldn't get done. I believe this is forcing management to make what are known as &quot;decisions&quot;, and a lot of managers don't like that - but just as they expect you to do your job, you may have to push them to do theirs!

 

[jockbir]

Good Luck! I presented all our projects and was told I was just stressing out! Two people, according to them know everything I do and can do it better and have done it are the bosses ear! Anything they say goes! You can present them bonafide backup and they will tell you that they have done it and been there and know what they are talking about. Not you or your people!

Good Luck!!!

jockbir