ProjectInitialConditions

In WhatSlowsYourProjectsDown Dale Emery mentions velocity. This is both speed and direction ... sort of reminds me of "Lost, but Making Good Time." (From Slack by Tom DeMarco).

In Five Core Metrics Putnam and Myers posit that [program]size[at some quality] is a function of effort, time, and process productivity (page 92). Does this address intial conditions?

For example, if the project personnel just finished a death march, effort and productivity and effort may start below with a negative value. As staff handles different obligations (previous releases/projects, family, training) effort may temporialy be negative.

Likewise, changing the development process to the Process of the Month reduces effectiveness.

What initial conditions exist for projects? How do these affect the final project state? -- DonGray 2004.06.07

Don, I don't know if you wanted negative conditions or not, but here's one I see all the time: Starving the Project of Necessary Resources. At the beginning of the project, some of the necessary people are not available (testers, designers, architects, whomever), but the project starts anyway because "we're in a rush." But, the decisions people make at the beginning of the project have a huge impact on the problems they encounter at the end, so the same people are stuck on this project past the time they wanted, starving the next project.

I see this most often with testers. The testers aren't available to advocate for testability during requirements or design because they're still testing the last release. So the project continues without testability or rational requirements (or whatever) until the end. At the end of the project, the product hits system test and the testers see red flags, "What were you thinking? This isn't how customers use the product. We can't test this" and on and on.. But because the managers can't or won't declare victory and end the project, the testers persevere and starve the next project of testers until something big happens. That something prompts a ClimbOutOfTechDebt project, which if it's starved for resources, also fails.

Maybe someone else has a good set of initial conditions :-) -- JohannaRothman 2004.07.08

One strange poor initial condition has to do with when the clock starts. I often see execs fiddle-diddle around for years talking about maybe doing a project, then, when they finally start, the clock has already been running for, say, three years. So, a year later, they put pressure on the project team (which has only been in existence for a year) because "you've spent four years on this already." - JerryWeinberg 2004.07.08

Johanna,

I don't know if you wanted negative conditions or not
My thought has to do with the ASSUMPTIONS when projects start. It would be marvelous to have examples of realistic assumptions. JohnSuzuki gave an example of an estimation assumption in WhatSlowsYourProjectsDown (2004.07.09). I recently read about metrics that "No measurement, no problem." I should have noted the reference.<sigh> In a quarter century, I've met one pessismitic estimator. The rest of us assume at LEAST 0 for the output level at t=0.

If you have the correct alignment of NOT WhatSlowsYourProjectsDown and HowToSpeedUpYourProject it would be possible to have an output level greater than 0 at t=0. Perhaps the Holy Grail of team based endeavors? DonGray 2004.07.10

If I had to define a set of initial conditions, they would be at least:

A project manager who has more than one technique for scheduling
The people with the appropriate skills (functional skills and domain expertise) <strong>available when they are needed </strong>
Some indication of at least some of the requirements in a ranked order (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, ...not high, medium, low)

What else? -- JohannaRothman 2004.07.11

Some expected payoff, and someone who wants that payoff. Someone willing to pony up the resources to get that payoff (III's Gold Owner and Goal Donor.)

-- JimBullock 2004.07.11 (What's in this for me?) [unending gratitude and respect? dg]

Johanna,

Suppose your manager's parents just died in a car accident. S/he also happens to be in the middle of a nasty divorce. I believe their initial condition is less than 0 since management will expect the same wonderful output observed on the last project, and the manager probably won't be able (for a while) to focus and perform like they historically did.

If the experienced people you need just came off a death march, they won't be as productive as management assumes.

I've worded my question poorly. Y'all offer good suggestions about "Starting Projects Correctly". I propose assumptions are made

- Problems at home don't affect work.
- I get 100% utilization when scheduling.
- Knowledge workers are fungible.
- I've spoken, shall it be.
- It's obvious what the user wants.

that just aren't so. DonGray 2004.7.12

I think the most important single thing you need to start a project correctly is at least two people who know how to be congruent most of the time, and recognize when they're not.

If there's only one, s/he will often think s/he's crazy, and eventually give in or leave.

If there's none, forget it. The first problem that comes along (and problems always come along) will start the downward emotional spiral, and there won't be anyone to stop it.

- JerryWeinberg 2004.07.12

Thanks Jerry,

This is pure gold, I just spent the past month thinking I was going crazy.

KenEstes 2004.07.15

Updated: Thursday, July 15, 2004