4 ms·

> acceptance criteria, testing requirements, and verification / support / warranty detailed Some orgs just don't have the in-house capability to do this, so th

> acceptance criteria, testing requirements, and verification / support / warranty detailed Some orgs just don't have the in-house capability to do this, so they seek a consulting firm... oh wait. Edit: I guess the strategy is to hire technical staff, keep them around a few years until you can be sure they can deliver on projects and understand your existing systems and processes, and then embark on the larger project to transform those systems and processes. Alternatively, shop around to find a consulting firm that is motivated to have good long-term outcomes. Probably a smaller operation, that has good word-of-mouth reputation, but doesn't have an established brand to fall back on.

aplummer 6y ago
Yep on a 100 million dollar budget you need to hire people to manage software delivery on your side and can never absolve end responsibility is definitely my point. I’m not describing how the world should work, just how it does when outsourcing IT to consultancies (which can work anywhere from successfully to very unsuccessfully)
aplummer 6y ago
To your edit: A good strategy is to hire a team, get a few consultants who have literally built the same system down the road, and use that blended team until 2.X release. That way you a team that has made a thing already (and often consultants are just as passionate about their work too!) ready to build a better 2.0, plus you keep responsibility and control.
- h0l0cube 6y ago
  > A good strategy is to hire a team Some orgs may not know how to hire. I think here, competent (and well connected) consultants can help, and maybe source from their own networks, but we're back to the dilemma of which consultants to trust. And let's not speak of recruitment agencies :)
harperlee 6y ago
Or hire 2: one for all those things, another one for actually delivering technical work. Hint: the rivalry will make it also expensive (extra meetings, defensive bullshit). But you will end up with what you wanted, at a price.

aplummer 6y ago

Yep on a 100 million dollar budget you need to hire people to manage software delivery on your side and can never absolve end responsibility is definitely my point. I’m not describing how the world should work, just how it does when outsourcing IT to consultancies (which can work anywhere from successfully to very unsuccessfully)

aplummer 6y ago

To your edit: A good strategy is to hire a team, get a few consultants who have literally built the same system down the road, and use that blended team until 2.X release. That way you a team that has made a thing already (and often consultants are just as passionate about their work too!) ready to build a better 2.0, plus you keep responsibility and control.

h0l0cube 6y ago
> A good strategy is to hire a team Some orgs may not know how to hire. I think here, competent (and well connected) consultants can help, and maybe source from their own networks, but we're back to the dilemma of which consultants to trust. And let's not speak of recruitment agencies :)

harperlee 6y ago

Or hire 2: one for all those things, another one for actually delivering technical work. Hint: the rivalry will make it also expensive (extra meetings, defensive bullshit). But you will end up with what you wanted, at a price.