If the crash-test dummies would do the same tasks as humans more effectively compared to the cost of change in given time-frame? Well, from business point of view, yes. When (if) you start to consider softer values or long-term development, it gets more complicated.
The trend is already to outsource everything (first manufacturing, then engineering, then design - you will see) to countries which provide more value for you money. In short term, you might find it very pleasing. But what will your grandchildren do for work after all the education, knowledge, research and manufacturing has been outsourced to cheaper countries already decades ago?
Sad to say, but currently i consult my clients to do former while on personal level i worry about the latter.
I think agile methods provide efficiency and if team is knowledgeable in different areas (mullti-disciplanary team) it can even result for better quality. For any development or usability methodology the value is eventually defining factor for it's survival. And for most managers value is something you can measure. And to be able to measure, you have to do things in pre-planned ways (to some extent). In smaller projects the measurements and predictability doesn't have time to raise to such dominant role.
In large-scale projects, you will not get stakeholder support if you don't have most of the things planned out in details. Go and try convence ad CEO and CIO that your developers are going to design and implement most of the software while they are programming it for two to three years. it just won't work. They want planning, schedules, timeteables, sub-projects, sub-plans tracking of expenses, status reports etc. Basically they want that project has planned goals, schedule for achieving each of the goals, estimate on how much resources it takes accomplish each goal and a way to track how things are progressing. I've seen some teams ignoring this (or trying to) when doing agile development as the managerial stuff is seen just as unproductive overhead. Client won't try agile method again as they feel insecure without their progress meters.
Hello, Jared. On Wednesday, January 31, 2007, at 2:49:21 PM, you
> On Jan 30, 2007, at 11:28 PM, Ron Jeffries wrote:
>> Perhaps there are more kinds of business value than just "revenue".
>> How many can you think of?
> There are five, including revenue.
> 1) Increased Revenue
> 2) Reduced Expenses
> 3) Increased Marketshare (new customers)
> 4) Increased Business (sales to existing customers)
> 5) Increased Shareholder Value
> That's it.
> Anything else has to serve one of those 5 things, or it has no value.
> (Or REALIZED value, as it's been said elsewhere. :) )
So, for example, we could replace all the employees with crash test
dummies, and there would be no loss of value?
Here is Edward Bear, coming downstairs now, bump, bump, bump, on the back
of his head. It is, as far as he knows, the only way of coming downstairs,
but sometimes he feels that there really is another way, if only he could
stop bumping for a moment and think of it. And then he feels that perhaps
there isn't. -- A. A. Milne
|This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Capgemini Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message.|