When the developers come up with a time frame and a cost and consequences, and that is too long, too much and not too palatable.
Entire argument in the bin, isn't it?
Nobody trusts what they don't understand.
Those checks and balances are deliverables, and deadlines and costs, and change requests and omissions...
But the plan was done based on what people wished to happen, not what could or would.
I need it by X.
I can spend Y on it.
That means I plan for Z. Z isn't achievable say the developers. Yes it is says the PM / Manager / CIO.
See it's on the plan, say manager pointing vigourously with both sides of his half hair piece.
Developer shrugs and walks away knowing they aren't going to win the argument.
Two weeks later.
The timeline is still fixed.
The resources are still fixed.
The goal posts have moved around about eight times, the project is twice as big as it was and despite all this, you untrustworthy developer types are still late....
So the only two ways to be a good CIO/ PM/ Manager
Are to know and accept this, may be even, he whispers, plan for it...
Or you can just blame the devs...
Keep Up with TechRepublic