3 ms·

It's kinda crazy how much money gets thrown around by an org you wouldn't think twice about. If a group of engineers from HN got together and secured a deal lik

It's kinda crazy how much money gets thrown around by an org you wouldn't think twice about. If a group of engineers from HN got together and secured a deal like that, they could easily retire with that kind of money.

ben_jones 9y ago
We'd have to work a lot on our golf game to secure that kind of contract.
acdha 9y ago
Never underestimate the complexity of those projects: I’d bet that the requirements would fill a bookshelf, and simply navigating the hurdles to bid & convince them that you have the resources to deliver would rule out a group of engineers below the triple digit range. (Yes, that’s not a good way to build things successfully. Welcome to enterprise IT.)
- Retric 9y ago
  In theory the requirements fill a bookshelf in practice nobody checks them that closely outside of fairly basic automated tests for things like 508 compliance.
  - acdha 9y ago
    This is both untrue – maybe they don’t check 100% but everyone who put something on that list is going to notice if you leave their needs unmet – and it doesn’t matter unless you know which things won’t be checked. Otherwise you have liability for not delivering, which probably means you take on the same level of complexity as requested even if much of that effort is wasted or counterproductive.
    - Retric 9y ago
      It's true that a range of stakeholders care about different things, but the solution is to demo the project regularly to verify it fit's basic needs and covers everyone's pet issue. Gov software projects are on a pass fail scale, and people have minimal expectations despite what they may hope to see. The waterfall approach of gather a bunch of details > build something is more about budget than a black and white must meet 100% of every specific req.
      - acdha 9y ago
        The problem is when people are restricted by policy or law from not using waterfall. So many bad government outcomes are caused by attempts to prevent a past mistake on a different kind of project.
      - acdha 9y ago
        The problem is when people are restricted by policy or law from not using waterfall. So many bad government outcomes are caused by attempts to prevent a past mistake on a different kind of project and changing those policies is harder than trying to muddle through any one project.
- FLUX-YOU 9y ago
  They might not even have solid requirements. Or they change from week-to-week. And/or the people writing them don't have enough knowledge to essentially be the PMs for the project.
- teddyuk 9y ago
  Also the companies aren't geared up to even know what they want so they can't even explain the complexities or even comprehend what needs doing. I have literally seen a multi-million pound project on the requirements "take our app that works and make a new one that looks like facebook", unsurprisingly it failed completely and didn't meet the requirements which were basically made up on the fly as bugs were raised.

ben_jones 9y ago

We'd have to work a lot on our golf game to secure that kind of contract.

acdha 9y ago

Never underestimate the complexity of those projects: I’d bet that the requirements would fill a bookshelf, and simply navigating the hurdles to bid & convince them that you have the resources to deliver would rule out a group of engineers below the triple digit range. (Yes, that’s not a good way to build things successfully. Welcome to enterprise IT.)

Retric 9y ago
In theory the requirements fill a bookshelf in practice nobody checks them that closely outside of fairly basic automated tests for things like 508 compliance.
- acdha 9y ago
  This is both untrue – maybe they don’t check 100% but everyone who put something on that list is going to notice if you leave their needs unmet – and it doesn’t matter unless you know which things won’t be checked. Otherwise you have liability for not delivering, which probably means you take on the same level of complexity as requested even if much of that effort is wasted or counterproductive.
  - Retric 9y ago
    It's true that a range of stakeholders care about different things, but the solution is to demo the project regularly to verify it fit's basic needs and covers everyone's pet issue. Gov software projects are on a pass fail scale, and people have minimal expectations despite what they may hope to see. The waterfall approach of gather a bunch of details > build something is more about budget than a black and white must meet 100% of every specific req.
    - acdha 9y ago
      The problem is when people are restricted by policy or law from not using waterfall. So many bad government outcomes are caused by attempts to prevent a past mistake on a different kind of project.
    - acdha 9y ago
      The problem is when people are restricted by policy or law from not using waterfall. So many bad government outcomes are caused by attempts to prevent a past mistake on a different kind of project and changing those policies is harder than trying to muddle through any one project.
FLUX-YOU 9y ago
They might not even have solid requirements. Or they change from week-to-week. And/or the people writing them don't have enough knowledge to essentially be the PMs for the project.
teddyuk 9y ago
Also the companies aren't geared up to even know what they want so they can't even explain the complexities or even comprehend what needs doing. I have literally seen a multi-million pound project on the requirements "take our app that works and make a new one that looks like facebook", unsurprisingly it failed completely and didn't meet the requirements which were basically made up on the fly as bugs were raised.