Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [XP] Contractor Rate Based On Velocity

Expand Messages
  • Jeff Anderson
    Agreed, on both points ... -- Sent from my mobile device Jeff Anderson http://agileconsulting.blogspot.com/
    Message 1 of 59 , Mar 14 9:16 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      Agreed, on both points

      On 3/13/10, George Dinwiddie <lists@...> wrote:
      > Jeff,
      >
      > Yes, it's certainly sometimes true that a client will find it easier to
      > stick with a supplier in spite of disappointment. But the universe of
      > possible contexts is so large and varied that I find it difficult to
      > generalize from that. Sometimes it's quite easy for a client to drop
      > one supplier and start with another, or to drop the project completely.
      >
      > It would be more interesting, to me, to talk about what would give the
      > client more confidence and freedom. What can the client do to enhance
      > that? What can the supplier do, and why would the supplier do it?
      >
      > But that, I think, is a different thread from this one.
      >
      > - George
      >
      > Jeff Anderson wrote:
      >> Maybe I'm speaking to simplistically for that I apologize, where I'm
      >> getting at is that its often difficult to pull out of a job once work
      >> has started even of you receive new information from the supplier that
      >> you don't like. Its often easier to just stay with that supplier, and
      >> maybe not use them the nexy time round.
      >>
      >> I feel this is often the case with software, its hard for a client to
      >> just tool down mid project, its expensive and disruptive, things need
      >> to be really bad before this is considered.
      >>
      >> I wasn't implying that all vendors do a bad job just that customers
      >> won't switch mid project as soon as something happens that they don't
      >> like.
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >> On 3/13/10, George Dinwiddie <lists@...> wrote:
      >>> Jeff,
      >>>
      >>> I'm not sure what you say is generally true. Certainly the last time I
      >>> took my car in for work, they found it needed some other work not in the
      >>> estimate. In fact, that other work was about twice the cost on top of
      >>> the initial estimate.
      >>>
      >>> But I didn't feel held hostage. For cashflow reasons, I postponed the
      >>> additional work and just stuck to my immediate needs. And, in fact, I
      >>> may look for a cheaper place to get this additional work done (not
      >>> wanting to put a huge investment in a 16 year old car). In the mean
      >>> time, I'm happy with the value I received.
      >>>
      >>> - George
      >>>
      >>> Jeff Anderson wrote:
      >>>> In non programming industries, if a feature is found out to be more
      >>>> expensive once work has already started the customer usually feels to
      >>>> be held hostage to get the work finished regardless.
      >>>>
      >>>> No one wants to take a broken car to a new repair shop mid repair, nor
      >>>> get new contractors to work on your kitchen floor half way through a
      >>>> project.
      >>>>
      >>>> The client needs to feel reallt violated before switching mid project,
      >>>> of course he will think twice before starting a new project if he
      >>>> hasn't received good value.
      >>>>
      >>>> Q
      >>>>
      >>>> On 3/11/10, Adam Sroka <adam.sroka@...> wrote:
      >>>>> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 1:46 PM, George Dinwiddie
      >>>>> <lists@...> wrote:
      >>>>>>
      >>>>>> John Maxwell wrote:
      >>>>>>>> When your car repairman gives you an estimate, what happens when the
      >>>>>>>> actual turns out to be higher
      >>>>>>> He calls and asks if I still want the work done.
      >>>>>> Exactly. When the cost is discovered to be higher than anticipated,
      >>>>>> it's time for a conversation. It's still paying by the feature--or
      >>>>>> deciding not to get the feature.
      >>>>>>
      >>>>> Yep. Also, savvy folks in these industries have specific contracts and
      >>>>> conventions that stipulate what constitutes a change in price, a
      >>>>> defect in workmanship, normal variation in labor costs, etc. For
      >>>>> example in the automotive business the price of a part is not supposed
      >>>>> to change after it is quoted (unless we have to get a different kind
      >>>>> of part, e.g. a new one vs a remanufactured one, etc.) Also in the
      >>>>> automotive business labor charges are based on a "black book" which
      >>>>> says how long a job is supposed to take. Most of the time it actually
      >>>>> takes less than that, but sometimes it takes more. In either case you
      >>>>> are supposed to charge the standard number of hours. If I install a
      >>>>> defective part and have to replace it I am legally obliged to absorb
      >>>>> that cost.
      >>>>>
      >>>>> If we did software more like that we would have to develop some
      >>>>> similar conventions of our own.
      >>>>>
      >>> --
      >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
      >>> * George Dinwiddie * http://blog.gdinwiddie.com
      >>> Software Development http://www.idiacomputing.com
      >>> Consultant and Coach http://www.agilemaryland.org
      >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
      >>>
      >>>
      >>
      >
      > --
      > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
      > * George Dinwiddie * http://blog.gdinwiddie.com
      > Software Development http://www.idiacomputing.com
      > Consultant and Coach http://www.agilemaryland.org
      > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
      >
      >

      --
      Sent from my mobile device

      Jeff Anderson

      http://agileconsulting.blogspot.com/
    • Jeff Anderson
      Agreed, on both points ... -- Sent from my mobile device Jeff Anderson http://agileconsulting.blogspot.com/
      Message 59 of 59 , Mar 14 9:16 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        Agreed, on both points

        On 3/13/10, George Dinwiddie <lists@...> wrote:
        > Jeff,
        >
        > Yes, it's certainly sometimes true that a client will find it easier to
        > stick with a supplier in spite of disappointment. But the universe of
        > possible contexts is so large and varied that I find it difficult to
        > generalize from that. Sometimes it's quite easy for a client to drop
        > one supplier and start with another, or to drop the project completely.
        >
        > It would be more interesting, to me, to talk about what would give the
        > client more confidence and freedom. What can the client do to enhance
        > that? What can the supplier do, and why would the supplier do it?
        >
        > But that, I think, is a different thread from this one.
        >
        > - George
        >
        > Jeff Anderson wrote:
        >> Maybe I'm speaking to simplistically for that I apologize, where I'm
        >> getting at is that its often difficult to pull out of a job once work
        >> has started even of you receive new information from the supplier that
        >> you don't like. Its often easier to just stay with that supplier, and
        >> maybe not use them the nexy time round.
        >>
        >> I feel this is often the case with software, its hard for a client to
        >> just tool down mid project, its expensive and disruptive, things need
        >> to be really bad before this is considered.
        >>
        >> I wasn't implying that all vendors do a bad job just that customers
        >> won't switch mid project as soon as something happens that they don't
        >> like.
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >> On 3/13/10, George Dinwiddie <lists@...> wrote:
        >>> Jeff,
        >>>
        >>> I'm not sure what you say is generally true. Certainly the last time I
        >>> took my car in for work, they found it needed some other work not in the
        >>> estimate. In fact, that other work was about twice the cost on top of
        >>> the initial estimate.
        >>>
        >>> But I didn't feel held hostage. For cashflow reasons, I postponed the
        >>> additional work and just stuck to my immediate needs. And, in fact, I
        >>> may look for a cheaper place to get this additional work done (not
        >>> wanting to put a huge investment in a 16 year old car). In the mean
        >>> time, I'm happy with the value I received.
        >>>
        >>> - George
        >>>
        >>> Jeff Anderson wrote:
        >>>> In non programming industries, if a feature is found out to be more
        >>>> expensive once work has already started the customer usually feels to
        >>>> be held hostage to get the work finished regardless.
        >>>>
        >>>> No one wants to take a broken car to a new repair shop mid repair, nor
        >>>> get new contractors to work on your kitchen floor half way through a
        >>>> project.
        >>>>
        >>>> The client needs to feel reallt violated before switching mid project,
        >>>> of course he will think twice before starting a new project if he
        >>>> hasn't received good value.
        >>>>
        >>>> Q
        >>>>
        >>>> On 3/11/10, Adam Sroka <adam.sroka@...> wrote:
        >>>>> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 1:46 PM, George Dinwiddie
        >>>>> <lists@...> wrote:
        >>>>>>
        >>>>>> John Maxwell wrote:
        >>>>>>>> When your car repairman gives you an estimate, what happens when the
        >>>>>>>> actual turns out to be higher
        >>>>>>> He calls and asks if I still want the work done.
        >>>>>> Exactly. When the cost is discovered to be higher than anticipated,
        >>>>>> it's time for a conversation. It's still paying by the feature--or
        >>>>>> deciding not to get the feature.
        >>>>>>
        >>>>> Yep. Also, savvy folks in these industries have specific contracts and
        >>>>> conventions that stipulate what constitutes a change in price, a
        >>>>> defect in workmanship, normal variation in labor costs, etc. For
        >>>>> example in the automotive business the price of a part is not supposed
        >>>>> to change after it is quoted (unless we have to get a different kind
        >>>>> of part, e.g. a new one vs a remanufactured one, etc.) Also in the
        >>>>> automotive business labor charges are based on a "black book" which
        >>>>> says how long a job is supposed to take. Most of the time it actually
        >>>>> takes less than that, but sometimes it takes more. In either case you
        >>>>> are supposed to charge the standard number of hours. If I install a
        >>>>> defective part and have to replace it I am legally obliged to absorb
        >>>>> that cost.
        >>>>>
        >>>>> If we did software more like that we would have to develop some
        >>>>> similar conventions of our own.
        >>>>>
        >>> --
        >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
        >>> * George Dinwiddie * http://blog.gdinwiddie.com
        >>> Software Development http://www.idiacomputing.com
        >>> Consultant and Coach http://www.agilemaryland.org
        >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
        >>>
        >>>
        >>
        >
        > --
        > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
        > * George Dinwiddie * http://blog.gdinwiddie.com
        > Software Development http://www.idiacomputing.com
        > Consultant and Coach http://www.agilemaryland.org
        > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
        >
        >

        --
        Sent from my mobile device

        Jeff Anderson

        http://agileconsulting.blogspot.com/
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.