From: Andrew Gabb (agabb@tpgi.com.au)
Date: Fri Apr 11 2003 - 11:34:43 EST
Ian F Alexander wrote:
> ah, but some models lead people to attempt to do unhelpful
> things on projects. A naively applied view of the WM that
> leads project management (QA, etc) to forbid changes to the
> requirements, or encourages planning with no room for
> iteration, or forbids contact with users on the grounds that
> they might interfere (yes, I've seen this), can seriously
> damage a project.
I consider that *all* project process models, applied with no other knowledge or experience, can be seen to "lead people to attempt to do unhelpful things on projects". This includes the Waterfall, Boehm's Spiral, SW-CMM, CMMI, RUP model, DOD-STD-498 model, IEEE/ISO 12207 model, agile models, the Shewart cycle (and its countless derivatives), etc. If you like I can give examples of any or your favourites, here or otherwise, and show why they can also be seen to "lead people to attempt to do unhelpful things on projects".
I don't 'support' the WM particularly above any others. However, it has the advantage of being nice and simple, and mostly sound if not taken to extremes, and used flexibly. I still routinely find errors being made on projects which could have been avoided by an understanding of the WM - *FAR* more than I see caused by strict adherence to any model (or someone's faulty understanding of what that model may be). Models are not the problem - ignorance in chaos is the problem.
Some models are more 'complete' than others, but not necessarily better. All are challenged continuously, sometimes by those who have no real understanding of the models or the realities of practical project management and technical issues, but also sometimes by others who really should know better. (And no, I'm not pointing any particular finger at any particular person, Ian.)
We all learn by developing mental models complemented by other information learned in various forums, including formal teaching and practice. As time goes by, either in our training or our experience, those mental models evolve. Good training uses this approach (how did you learn maths or physics?). The WM is a good starting model, in my view, and is much better than the chaos that is so common.
A project manager who lives by and enforces the WM has an immature mental model. Don't blame the WM! Blame his education and experience and your own inability to influence him.
Remember also you will find countless allies among those who also have immature mental models, some even less than the maturity of the WM, and who favour anarchy over discipline. You will also find many academics who support your position, who will want to replace the WM with their own, and who have even less real experience that the PM (but who have read a lot of similar information from other academics).
These are dubious allies at best - at worst, the PM may lump you in with them, and ignore the lot of you. In some ways, I don't blame him for this.
Andrew
-- Andrew Gabb email: agabb@tpgi.com.au Adelaide, South Australia phone: +61 8 8342-1021, fax: +61 8 8269-3280 ----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To send a message to this mailing list send it to re-online@it.uts.edu.au. To unsubscribe from this mailing list, email majordomo@it.uts.edu.au with the message `unsubscribe re-online' in the BODY of the mail.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Mon Apr 14 2003 - 09:00:09 EST