Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!helios.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!agate!garnet.berkeley.edu!csm
From: csm@garnet.berkeley.edu
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
Subject: Re: Reporting progress on a software project
Summary: Tell the truth or endure the consequences.
Message-ID: <11016@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: 16 Jun 88 20:00:55 GMT
References: <917@blue.engin.umich.edu> <10941@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> <1377@wor-mein.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@agate.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 23

In article <1377@wor-mein.UUCP> pete@wor-mein.UUCP (Pete Turner) writes:
>In article <10941@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> bks@ALFA.berkeley.edu writes:
 >>You must have the following guarantees from the powers that be:
 >>   1) Hardware and Software for the project will be delivered
 >>to you on schedule or the project will be extended on a day
 >>for day basis.  If you are not responsible for procurement  
 >>and/or installation make sure that delays in this process are 
 >>documented and added linearly to expected delivery date.  
 >>Brad
>Has any engineer out there EVER been able to get "the powers that be" to
>sign up to slip a project schedule in this fashion?
>This sounds completely unrealistic to me, even if it does make sense.
>Pete

   If you can point to a history of delivering good products on-time
(it is possible), you can begin to make the rules.  If you are in the
position of setting schedules for project delivery, you have to decide
whether to tell the people with the $$$ the truth or what they want to 
hear.  I was predicating my statements on the former, although I admit
the latter will get you more first-time business.
   One thing we should all learn about negotiations from the Reagan DoD
budgets is that if you need 50 demand 150. Then howl like a banshee as
you grudgingly settle for 133.
   --Brad Sherman