tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10301362.post5076861971843591264..comments2023-05-08T05:53:19.217-06:00Comments on Bob Parkinson's Web Log: It's War, and It's a ProjectBob Parkinsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11346024287164216473noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10301362.post-29675227308423587532009-12-04T20:59:59.905-07:002009-12-04T20:59:59.905-07:00Many project plans include a large section near th...Many project plans include a large section near the beginning called <i>Analysis</i>. That portion of the project is usually characterized by analytical thought - or at least it should be. During that portion of the project, it's important to weed out ambiguity, and do away with erroneous assumptions and biases.<br /><br />Some people don't give enough credit to the <i>Analysis</i> phase. These people think that if you're not developing code, you're not making progress. The risk of bypassing the <i>Analysis</i> phase, however, is that time and money are wasted building the wrong thing.<br /><br />The McCain argument is that you don't tell your enemy when you're leaving. If you do, the enemy will just hunker down until you leave. That argument doesn't consider what our troops will be doing between now and when they do leave, and it incorrectly assumes that the Obama policy is to leave irregardless of the state of the conflict.<br /><br />There is also a parallel to the process that Obama just went through and a similar process that Bush went through prior to the surge in Iraq. The Bush process was detailed in a Bob Woodward book (I believe it was <i>State of Denial: Bush at War, Part III</i>). What was different about the Bush process is that the public was being told that the war in Iraq was on track, but the Bush administration was scrambling for a new plan in secret because the they knew that it was not going well. Pundits were not criticizing George Bush for taking too long because the pundits didn't know that the process was going on. In Obama's world, there was no deceit. <br /><br />With regard to IT and project management, there are some other displines called <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agile_software_development" rel="nofollow">Agile</a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrum_%28development%29" rel="nofollow">Scrum</a> that conflict with some of the more traditional project management methodologies. Some people in the Scrum world may do without the traditional <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gant_chart" rel="nofollow">Gantt</a> style project plans that we've grown accustomed to (e.g., Microsoft Project plans). I have some familiarity, but I have only used bits and pieces in my work. These mthodologies are not restricted to software development, and several success stories exist in manufacturing (e.g., Toyota). You might find those linked pages interesting.Bowie Mikehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09656054601003840365noreply@blogger.com