■ Project A will eventually cost about a million dollars
and produce value of around $1.1 million.
■ Project B will eventually cost about a million dollars
and produce value of more than $50 million.
> To my mind, the question that’s much more important than how to control a software project is, why on earth are we doing so many projects that deliver such marginal value?"
Most in-house software is largely about corporate control of employee actions through the enforcement of particular workflows. On the surface, they're supposed to be about workflows that increase efficiency, but they're not really. Sometimes control is clearly higher up on the priority ladder than efficiency.
This is often why such projects require so much control and produce less value. They're about exerting control in the first place, and the user's desires have to be suppressed to exert this control.
An analogy: Some schools pave walkways, then fine students who cut across the grass. Other schools wait, watch where students wear paths in the grass and pave there. The 2nd option is more effective and gives the most benefit.
IT should not be used for control but to gather data to find efficiencies. The former discourages in-house innovation, the latter encourages it.
Most in-house software is largely about corporate control of employee actions through the enforcement of particular workflows. On the surface, they're supposed to be about workflows that increase efficiency, but they're not really. Sometimes control is clearly higher up on the priority ladder than efficiency.
This is often why such projects require so much control and produce less value. They're about exerting control in the first place, and the user's desires have to be suppressed to exert this control.
An analogy: Some schools pave walkways, then fine students who cut across the grass. Other schools wait, watch where students wear paths in the grass and pave there. The 2nd option is more effective and gives the most benefit.
IT should not be used for control but to gather data to find efficiencies. The former discourages in-house innovation, the latter encourages it.