I worked in a product based company. In theory, each project just took the product baseline, configured a project specific database, added any new project features, and you were all done, easy peasy. So management estimated that the software for every project, which previously took about three years, should only take about six months.
The reality was that every project was taking longer, often significantly longer, because product was an over architected, undocumented, buggy mess. Of course, management refused to believe that, because they'd spent millions of dollars building it, and the architects (product owners) repeatedly convinced them that it was rock solid, proven, and tested.
I worked on three projects that had a function (call it Blipvert) that was supposedly in the product baseline, and in every project, it took months of reverse engineering, design, and outright hacking to make it even marginally functional. Even then, customers complained it was fragile and unreliable, because it was.
Nevertheless, when I was put on a new project, and it came time to estimate how long it would take to implement Bliptvert, we had pretty much the same conversation here. Everyone on the team who hadn't worked on a Blipvert said it looked easy, and should only take a few days. I said it would likely take six or more weeks.
The manager rejected my estimate saying "You have it working in Product – just need to see what you need to bring into [project] to support it", and told the PMO that we could make the two week deadline, easily.
Six weeks later, they took it away from me and assigned to "someone competent". After he spent two months struggling with it, they called the senior architect, who looked at the project, and casually said "Oh, you're based on v8. Blipvert doesn't work in v8, you'll have to port to v9", and washed his hands of it, saying the Blipvert implementation in v8 was "as is" and not supported.
I left the company, but still keep in touch. New projects are still being based off of v8, because it's cheaper than v9 for customers. And apparently managers are still promising Blipvert to PMOs in two weeks, despite every project taking months to re-implement it.
I once worked on a project that I estimated would take two days. Admins told the client it would take three weeks, but then had me hold off starting on it for four weeks. It only took me a day, but to the client it looked like we underestimated. I'm not sure what the admins were trying to accomplish.
Therapist: "How's the new CV/resume coming along? Have you met with the College recruiter to discuss getting more paperwork to represent your skills more thoroughly so you can GTFO on the schedule we've planned?"
At least that's what mine said. Feels better to move along, nothing to see here.
Bob gives the therapist a job
Many, if not all, problems in the world are job creators.
Boss, I think you need to put your hearing aids back in. 🧐
We'll need therapists until the last manager dies.
I worked in a product based company. In theory, each project just took the product baseline, configured a project specific database, added any new project features, and you were all done, easy peasy. So management estimated that the software for every project, which previously took about three years, should only take about six months.
The reality was that every project was taking longer, often significantly longer, because product was an over architected, undocumented, buggy mess. Of course, management refused to believe that, because they'd spent millions of dollars building it, and the architects (product owners) repeatedly convinced them that it was rock solid, proven, and tested.
I worked on three projects that had a function (call it Blipvert) that was supposedly in the product baseline, and in every project, it took months of reverse engineering, design, and outright hacking to make it even marginally functional. Even then, customers complained it was fragile and unreliable, because it was.
Nevertheless, when I was put on a new project, and it came time to estimate how long it would take to implement Bliptvert, we had pretty much the same conversation here. Everyone on the team who hadn't worked on a Blipvert said it looked easy, and should only take a few days. I said it would likely take six or more weeks.
The manager rejected my estimate saying "You have it working in Product – just need to see what you need to bring into [project] to support it", and told the PMO that we could make the two week deadline, easily.
Six weeks later, they took it away from me and assigned to "someone competent". After he spent two months struggling with it, they called the senior architect, who looked at the project, and casually said "Oh, you're based on v8. Blipvert doesn't work in v8, you'll have to port to v9", and washed his hands of it, saying the Blipvert implementation in v8 was "as is" and not supported.
I left the company, but still keep in touch. New projects are still being based off of v8, because it's cheaper than v9 for customers. And apparently managers are still promising Blipvert to PMOs in two weeks, despite every project taking months to re-implement it.
I really don't miss that place.
I once worked on a project that I estimated would take two days. Admins told the client it would take three weeks, but then had me hold off starting on it for four weeks. It only took me a day, but to the client it looked like we underestimated. I'm not sure what the admins were trying to accomplish.
Therapist: "How's the new CV/resume coming along? Have you met with the College recruiter to discuss getting more paperwork to represent your skills more thoroughly so you can GTFO on the schedule we've planned?"
At least that's what mine said. Feels better to move along, nothing to see here.
Yeah I've had that thought