Bob’s Report – The cost of redundant processes
Have you ever been in a situation where you wondered where the original business requirement came from?
“Bob’s report must be produced every Monday morning by 10am!”
- Mary extracts the data from the database
- Bill adds the data to a spreadsheet and applies some pivots to massage the data
- Sue looks at the report and makes sure there are no errors
- Harry applies some text to the report and finishes off the formatting, then emails the report to Bob
- Bob looks through the 200 unread emails in his inbox and tries to prioritize them. In the end he glances at “his” report for 30 seconds and thinks nothing more of it.
Where did the requirement for Bob’s report come from? Lets look at the history behind this requirement.
1996 – A new application is implemented for tracking the sale of widgets
1997 – Jean the head of sales has the requirement for a sales report for her weekly meeting with the CEO at midday on a Monday. She describes her requirements to the business analyst implementing the application. The format is decided and the process to produce the report is documented and discussed with the parties involved
2005 – Jean leaves Widgets inc. for a new position at another company. Bob is employed as head of sales. The CEO and Bob decide that they are going to meet on a Wednesday every other week to discuss the sale of widgets.
“Bob’s report” (originally Jean’s report) hasn’t been reassessed since 1997. Since 1997 Widgets inc have changed personnel and business processes have been updated. Technology has changed since 1997 and the process of producing Bob’s report should be much easier with a more modern approach (automated processing with Microsoft SQL Server Reporting Services, Business Objects, Cognos and many more). What’s more, four people have spent hours of time on a Monday morning producing a report for the past 6 years and it is not even read!
Solving the problem
This may be an extreme example, but I can guarantee you will have come across a similar scenario either in the organization you work in or in other organizations if you are a consultant like me. In so many cases we hit a wall when we ask the question, “Why do we need X?” Many times the reason is political, but in some cases it is purely because of a historical requirement and no one is prepared to ask the question. As it turns out, Bob is unaware of the effort that goes into producing his report; if he knew he would stop this process or refine the contents of the report so that it is more useful.
As consultants or business analysts we are always likely to have to dig deeper until we can find the truth. One method that can be useful is to follow the “5 Whys“:
The 5 Whys is a questions-asking method used to explore the cause/effect relationships underlying a particular problem. Ultimately, the goal of applying the 5 Whys method is to determine a root cause of a defect or problem.
Quite often we find that the problem is several levels deep. Using the 5 Whys technique can help to get to the root cause of a business problem rather than the apparent problem on the surface, or even worse a problem that has not been identified.
As consultants our hardest task can be getting to talk to the right people. How can we reach our goal in a reasonable time without upsetting too many people? Here are some rules we can follow:
- Set expectations up front. You want X number of hours time from people in the relevant areas of the business. You want to be able to speak to them in a reasonable period of time.
- Speak to the right people. You are not likely to get a lot of the CEO’s time, but if his or her input is likely to help ask for their time. Be prepared with targeted questions where possible:
- What reports do you currently receive? Do you use the data in these reports?
- What do you use this data for?
- What information is not made available to you that you would like to see?
- Don’t accept the answer “that’s just the way it’s done”. Use the 5 Whys to dig deeper until you find the real reason for a requirement.
- Stick to your guns!
Remember, getting down to the root cause will benefit the organization you are working for. They may be throwing thousands of dollars per year away on Bob’s reports.
Show them the numbers – it’s results that matter
On a recent project one of our customers had some questions about the project’s progress. The project was a mid-size systems integration between Oracle Financials and Onyx CRM for a Fortune 500 company.
As with many large companies, there were several business units and people with interest in the project, and also as with many large companies, people had several other projects to deal with and were not attending the daily standups or weekly progress meetings.
I began to hear that there were some concerns about the project progress from some of the management team and a concern that we were spending too much time writing tests instead of code.
This came as a big surprise to me: from the perspective of the team working on the project on a daily basis (both customer and ext.IT), we were sailing along with no problems. We were providing the usual artifacts such as status reports which showed how we were tracking against estimated hours and when our code complete date would be, and all of this was tracking well against our original estimates, so to hear that people were unhappy was a big shock.
I called a meeting with all of the stakeholders and as soon as I invited all of the stakeholders I realized two things:
- This meeting would be the first time in the whole project that all of the stakeholders had been in a room together.
- While we had discussed our approach during the initial engagement, we hadn’t held a project kickoff with all of the stakeholders to discuss our approach to building software.
Both of these items were my fault, but here I was, several months into the project with an unhappy customer, so I thought I would address it in this meeting.
I put together a short presentation which discussed our approach to building software, including brief descriptions of how we perform iterations, test driven development, automated acceptance testing, retrospectives and other benefits to the way we build software, and why we considered our approach to be best practice.
Almost as an afterthought, I ended the presentation with a couple of slides showing our project status. This was an afterthought because everyone at the meeting was a recipient of the weekly status report containing the same information. I created one slide comparing our original project estimates (before we had detailed requirements) to our detailed estimates (once requirements were fleshed out) and to our actual hours so far on the completed features, and another slide showing our defect count and comparing it to another of the customer’s internal projects that they had build without the benefit of automated tests.
Once the meeting started, it was clear that I didn’t need any of the slides about our approach. We spent a few minutes discussing the original estimates against the actual time taken for completed features: everyone was happy with the job we had done in estimating against the original high-level requirements. We also discussed how we were tracking on the hours left: again, everyone was satisfied with the results. Finally, we spent five minutes comparing the low defect count on our project (with a high level of test automation), compared to some of the customer’s other projects (without unit tests), and everyone was satisfied with this too.
There wasn’t a single question about our approach, and ultimately no-one in the higher echelons of the customer’s business cared about the minutiae of our approach, nor were they interested in why we thought our approach was best practice.
They simply wanted to see the results of our approach.
In retrospect, this might seem obvious, but the best way to convince anyone that your approach to doing something is practical and pragmatic, is to do it and measure it against other approaches. People don’t care about dogma, or why you think something should be the best way. Only by showing people the numbers and measuring the effectiveness of your approach can you truly show that your practices are effective.
To conclude: After this meeting, the project was delivered successfully without any more concerns from the customer. We were one of several projects integrating with Oracle and we were the only project to deliver on time and under budget, with a very happy customer!
Is your consulting code an asset or a liability?
Overview
When you hire consultants to build software for you, how do you know if the code is worth the money you pay them?
Consulting code (indeed, any custom code) should be an asset to your business, but unfortunately, many times it’s quite the opposite.
Consulting code can become a liability. Lack of tests and poor quality, buggy code can leave you, your code and your pocket book in worse shape than before the consultants arrived (and usually with little to no recourse).
Untested code has no business value
Years ago at the Agile 2006 conference, one of the sessions was “Delivering flawless tested software every iteration”, delivered by Alex Pukinskis. The catchy name attracted a big audience and it was standing room only.
During this presentation, Alex made the following statement:[1]
Untested code has no business value
This struck a chord with me, because at the time I was working for a company that was trying to transition to agile, but many of our practices still hadn’t changed. We were (okay I was) still breaking the build and still expecting the QA team to find our bugs for us. We weren’t consistently doing TDD, we had no automation of the build acceptance and we were not practicing continuous integration. I could go on, but I’m sure you get the idea.
The “aha” moment for me was the concept that the quality of the code, and a lack of defects was my responsibility as a professional developer. It was my responsibility to ensure that no defects were passed to QA. Of course, I know that software cannot be perfect, and there will be defects, but my attitude towards defects changed after that talk. Defects should be unexpected. Defects should be unusual. Defects should be prevented, not found.
No Bugs
The attitude that defects should be prevented, not found, can be summarized in the “No Bugs” philosophy.
James Shore recently published the full text of the No Bugs section from his excellent Art of Agile book. He summarizes the text in 99 words:
Rather than fixing bugs, agile methods strive to prevent them.
Test-driven development structures work into easily-verifiable steps. Pair programming provides instant peer review, enhances brainpower, and maintains self-discipline. Energized work reduces silly mistakes. Coding standards and a “done done” checklist catch common errors.
On-site customers clarify requirements and discover misunderstandings. Customer tests communicate complicated domain rules. Iteration demos allow stakeholders to correct the team’s course.
Simple design, refactoring, slack, collective code ownership, and fixing bugs early eliminates bug breeding grounds. Exploratory testing discovers teams’ blind spots, and root-cause analysis allows teams to eliminate them.
Asking the right questions
Now you are probably expecting some sales pitch from me at this point to say that you should hire us because we’re great. Well that’s not the point of this post (although you should, and we are). The point of this post is that the next time you are talking to a consulting firm or hiring a developer[2], ask them about their definition of code quality and how they ensure it. By simply asking a couple of questions you should be able to determine whether they are all “smoke and mirrors” or if they will add value to your business. For example, you might ask:
- What is your definition of quality code?
- How do you ensure your code is bug free?
The answer to the first question should mention practices like the Law of Demeter, coding standards, refactoring and adherence to the SOLID principles.
Although unsettling, it is okay if the answer to the second question is “I‘m never 100% sure my code is bug free” (particularly if they mention Gödel’s proofs). However, they should quickly follow up with, “I make bugs less likely by practicing test driven development, peer reviews (or pair programming), automated acceptance tests and adherence to coding standards and good design principles.”
If they can answer those two questions to your satisfaction (and follow through by demonstrating these practices when building the code) then they might know what they are talking about, and actually give you value for your money.
- I’m not sure whether Alex was quoting someone, but googling that precise phrase returned zero results, so I’m attributing it to him [↩]
- For more information on hiring developer team members, read http://jamesshore.com/Blog/Alternatives-to-Certifications.html [↩]
Pragmatism in Business & Technology Strategy
Wiktionary defines pragmatic as:
pragmatic – Practical, concerned with making decisions and actions that are useful in practice, not just theory.
As a technology consulting organization we frequently get asked to assist people in defining or refining their business and technology strategy, or to explain why we’re an organization that people should work with.
My normal response when giving advice or answering this question is pretty simple: we focus on results – achieving a positive outcome for the business (in our case our customer’s business). I then go on to explain a little more of my thinking…
It’s rare to find a problem that has only a single possible solution – in most cases there are are a number, with some being better or worse, easier or harder, cheaper or more costly etc. How do we weigh up the options and help people pick the right approach? One word comes to mind: pragmatic.
Here are some ideas that we consider when helping our customers make pragmatic strategy choices.
Look Back as well as Forward!
Reality dictates that unless your business is a startup any strategy must co-exist with products, processes, systems and technology that are already in place. While we shouldn’t be bound by the past and present if there’s a good reason to move in a different direction, we should at least consider the implications for a business in moving to a new strategy.
Of course, this is also a good way to avoid making the mistakes of the past all over again.
Plan for Change
I’ve often heard people say that change is the only constant! Organizations grow, shrink, get acquired or dramatically change course all the time. Making strategic choices that recognize this and are at least partly proof to the winds of change may not be obvious to everyone at the time, but just about everyone can see them after the fact.
The first question from many of you will be “How do I know what will change, and when?”. The answer (of course) is that many times you won’t know precisely what will change, but you can often predict what is more likely to change. An example might be taxation rules or rates – if these factor into your decisions you had better assess the impact of them changing because you can be certain that over time they will!
Technology is a Tool, Not a Goal
I’m sure many of us know someone who just has to have the latest gadget or toy, and can find some “reason” why it’s valuable. We see the same thing in business surprisingly often – with the same lack of real results.
Weeding this out of your strategy can sometimes be a bit tougher than we think since simply not keeping pace with technology trends can mean death to some businesses. But even when we undertake pure technology modernization projects we should always consider whether we’re satisfying a true business need, and getting “value for money” compared to not doing it at all. If not, maybe we’re too focused on the technology, and not enough on the real goal.
No One Answer
Sometimes a single right answer may be unrealistic. A solution in one environment may simply add complexity or cause pain when applied to another. Don’t be afraid to choose two options if one is not enough. Or after reviewing all the options, the one where you do nothing at all may be the best!
Avoid Short Term Syndrome
How many “short-term” solutions become long term problems? It’s important to overcome resistance to looking forward, and to consider the same fundamentals – including future flexibility.
Agile Strategy
Finally, you might be wondering how the above fits alongside our stated preference for using an Agile approach to implementing technology solutions? My answer is that ultimately we believe the outcome is what is important, not the approach to getting there. Our current thinking (and we’re obviously not alone!) just happens to be that Agile approaches help organizations get there faster and more effectively than the alternatives right now.
To back this up from a slightly different perspective, Elisabeth Hendrickson recently discussed why she defines Agile in terms of results:
Where people define Agile in terms of practices, I see more instances of Cargo Cult adoption (”We’re Agile because we stand up every morning!”) and religious dogmatism (”You don’t TDD?!? You can’t possibly be Agile!”).
Where people define Agile in terms of values, I see more instances of Agile-as-an-excuse (”Documentation? No. We don’t document anything. We’re Agile!”).
But where people define Agile in terms of results, I see greater focus on the ultimate goal: value to the business.
I really couldn’t put it much better: attention to results keeps everyone focused on what’s ultimately important.
Are you tired of working with consulting companies who give you what you ask for, but not what you need? If you want to partner with us to extend your IT capabilities and produce real results, contact us
Heilmeier’s Catechism – a checklist for software projects
Until recently, I am ashamed to say that I had never heard of George Harry Heilmeier. A recent retweet by Roy Osherove on Twitter soon had me digging for more information.
It turns out that not only was Mr. Heilmeier a pioneering contributor to liquid crystal displays, he was a Vice President (and later CTO) of Texas Instruments during the time they produced the mighty Speak and Spell.
Mr Heilmeier’s Wikipedia page lists an amazing amount of awards, including the National Medal of Science and the IEEE Medal of Honor, but that’s not what sparked my curiousity.
What was interesting to me about Mr. Heilmeier was a series of questions anyone should be able to answer when proposing a research project or product development effort. These questions are known as Heilmeier’s Catechism.
Here is Heilmeier’s original list of questions:
Heilmeier’s Catechism
- What are you trying to do? Articulate your objectives using absolutely no jargon.
- How is it done today, and what are the limits of current practice?
- What’s new in your approach and why do you think it will be successful?
- Who cares?
- If you’re successful, what difference will it make?
- What are the risks and the payoffs?
- How much will it cost?
- How long will it take?
- What are the midterm and final “exams” to check for success?
When I read this list, it struck me that these questions could easily be adapted as a software project checklist.
With some small tweaks in language, this list becomes a standard project checklist that any consulting organization should work on with their customers to answer when deciding whether or not to go ahead with a project:
Project Checklist
- What is the underlying business problem we are trying to solve with this project?
- What happens today? Is this problem worked around with manual processes?
- What’s new in this approach and why do we think it will be successful?
- Who are the project stakeholders?
- If we’re successful, what difference will it make?
- What are the risks and the payoffs? How can the risks be mitigated?
- How much will it cost?
- How long will it take?
- How will we measure progress on the project? How do we know we’ve been successful?
What about your organization’s project approval process? Does your company use Heilmeier’s Catechism to decide whether to give a project a green light? What other questions should be asked before starting a project?
It hurts when I do this – an open letter to Software Consultants
There’s an old joke that goes something like this:
A young woman went to her doctor complaining of pain.”Where are you hurting?” asked the doctor.
“You have to help me, I hurt all over”, said the woman.
“What do you mean, all over?” asked the doctor, “be a little more specific.”
“The woman touched her right knee with her index finger and yelled, “Ow, that hurts.” Then she touched her left cheek and again yelled, “Ouch! That hurts, too.” Then she touched her right earlobe, “Ow, even THAT hurts”, she cried.
The doctor checked her thoughtfully for a moment and told her his diagnosis; “You have a broken finger.”
So what does this have to do with software development?
Too many times consulting companies get customers to tell them what they want and then they build it. What’s wrong with that? Isn’t there an old saying that says the customer is always right?
If you build what the customer asks for without digging deeper into the underlying business problem, then I guarantee that you will not build what they need. If you are just delivering a technical solution to a customer without figuring out whether you are solving the right problem in the best way, you aren’t giving your customer value for money. In fact, no matter how low you put your rates, you are short changing your customers, because you are charging them money to not fix their problems.
Just like a doctor’s patient can describe their symptoms, but doesn’t necessarily know the correct prescription to cure their ills, a customer is typically able to describe the business problem they are facing – but that doesn’t always make them the best person to come up with the solution. You need to collaborate with the customer and dig deeper to understand what the underlying issues are.
Of course, the customer is typically the expert in their domain and you should be the expert in yours, but you have to be more than just a technical expert to deliver business value. You need to be creative and passionate, you need to establish trust with the customer and build a collective sense of ownership of the problem so that you and the customer can both contribute to the solution.
You can use techniques like the Five Whys to perform root cause analysis, but ultimately you need to be interested and involved with your customers and care about their business. Only after defining the root cause of the problem can you then relate the problem to a solution you can provide with your domain expertise.
Ultimately, it’s not about delivering a project on time and under budget if that project isn’t effective; only by helping your customers succeed have you given value for money.
Are you tired of working with consulting companies who give you what you ask for, but not what you need? If you want to partner with us to extend your IT capabilities and produce real results, contact us
About us
Michael Locherer 
Michael (AKA “Milo”) serves as ext.IT’s President, and provides executive management of all ext.IT operations.
Formerly CEO of a technology services company based in Munich, Germany, and a practice leader with Onyx Software’s European and North American professional services team, Michael brings more than 15 years of experience in the technology industry across a broad range of organizations.
Milo will be blogging about business and software development.
Peter Drum 
Peter serves as ext.IT’s Vice-President of Business Development and oversees all sales, partnering and business development in all geographies. Peter also manages the Australia/New Zealand operations of ext.IT through extend.IT Australia.
Prior to co-founding ext.IT, Peter filled roles with Onyx Software’s North American and Asia-Pacific offices in vertical industry development and consulting management roles. Peter has more than 14 years experience in the technology industry across many geographies and markets.
Peter will be blogging about business development and other topics of interest to him.
Paddy Healey 
Paddy serves as ext.IT’s Director of Technical Consulting and Methodology, overseeing the quality of technical deliverables and working on constantly improving our methodology.
Prior to joining ext.IT, Paddy worked in corporate and government IT departments as well as Onyx R&D and Professional Services. Paddy has more than 20 years experience in the technology industry.
Paddy will be blogging about consulting and development best practices.
Andy Jimenez
Andy is a Technical Consultant at ext.IT. His job responsibilities include, well, whatever is needed! Andy has experience ranging from custom Systems integration, web application development to SaaS platform development and more!
Prior to joining ext.IT, Andy worked within Corporate IT departments as well as Onyx Professional Services. Andy has more than 10 years experience in the technology industry.
Andy will be blogging about technical tips and tricks, new technologies and solutions to interesting business problems.