Dr. Dobb's Agile Update 11/08



November 26, 2008
URL:http://www.drdobbs.com/architecture-and-design/dr-dobbs-agile-update-1108/212200803

In This Issue:

Strategies for Funding Software Development Projects

As a result of my recent column Is Fixed Price IT Unethical?, I've been subjected to a slew of accusations about not dealing with the real world. Sigh. The issue that people have with my position on fixed-price projects is that although they would love to abandon the practice they're not able to because of the realities of their organization. They've effectively given up trying to align their organization's business policies with their IT values, one of the practices of Lean Development Governance, and can't contemplate adopting more effective strategies for funding software development projects. I, on the other hand, haven't given up. I've found that when you choose to fight for it that you can convince your business stakeholders to rethink the way that they approach project funding. I can't always change their minds, but I've been successful with a large enough percentage that I believe it's worth our while to try -- hence my original column, the goal of which is to provide people with the data that they need to reasonably argue against fixed-price funding.

An important first step is to educate business stakeholders in the various funding options that they have available to them, or depending on the situation to understand the implications of the funding strategy which they're currently following. In this update I overview nine strategies for funding software development projects, discussing the tradeoffs of each. The first five strategies are very unfortunate at best and unethical at worst. The last four strategies require a good partnership between the business and IT, flexibility on the part of management, discipline on the part of IT, and the willingness of the business to be accountable for the decisions that it makes. These requirements can be difficult for many organizations to meet, hence the hopelessness felt by many IT professionals.

The first five strategies are different flavors of "fixed price, schedule, and scope" strategies which I'll refer to as fixed price for the sake of simplicity. These strategies are typically born from a lack of trust between the business and their IT provider, poor relationships between the two, and a desire for the business to not consider their IT provider to be an equal partner. Needless to say, these factors all bode ill for the long-term success of your IT department, let alone a single project.

Fixed-price strategies are motivated by the demand of business stakeholders for an "accurate", up-front estimate, the goal being to reduce the overall financial risk to the business. The five fixed-price strategies, which can be combined, are:

My experience is that we can do a lot better than the five previously described fixed-price strategies. IT departments with a good relationship with their business stakeholders, one that is built on trust and respect, will adopt one of the following project funding strategies:

As you've seen, there are many approaches to funding software development projects, and contrary to popular belief in many organizations, not all of them involve a fixed price. Business has to ask for options when it comes to funding strategies for IT because in most cases the IT provider will simply do what they're told and follow the strategy being set out by the business. Sadly many IT professionals, in particular those working in large organizations or for system integrators, have all but given up on trying to convince the business to adopt one of these strategies. As professionals it behooves us to give our business stakeholders a choice in the way that they fund projects. If we choose to fight for what we know works we'll eventually work our way off of the fixed-price treadmill that we currently find ourselves on.

Book Review

Beyond Budgeting: How Managers Can Break Free of the Annual Performance Trap
Jeremy Hope and Robin Fraser
Harvard Business School Press, 2003

I've been waiting a long time to find the right time to review Jeremy Hope and Robin Fraser's Beyond Budgeting: How Managers Can Break Free of the Annual Performance Trap, and this is clearly it. In Beyond Budgeting Hope and Fraser review the challenges with existing annual budgeting processes, and provide proven strategies for effectively addressing the business risks that traditional budgeting futilely strives to address. The problem with traditional budgeting is that managers soon begin to focus on making their numbers instead of adding real value to your customers. You know your organization has this problem if people commonly lament that management is too focused on quarterly results instead of long-term investment -- clearly a touchy subject in today's economic climate.

The philosophies described in the book are very similar to those espoused by the agile community --pushing decision-making authority down the hierarchy, promoting flexibility and quick decision making, promoting open and honest decision making, and promoting accountability and responsibility on the part of individuals. There are numerous examples, both good and bad, from a range of organizations world-wide, including large banks, petrochemical companies, manufacturing companies, and wholesalers. If you're truly interested in changing the business culture within your organization, this book will be a critical resource for you.

Hot Links

Is Fixed-Price Software Development Unethical?

The IBM Whitepaper Lean Development Governance by myself and Per Kroll overviews a collection of practice for effective governance of development projects.

My July 2008 Agile Update, Reducing the Risk of Fixed-Price Projects describes five strategies for reducing the inherent risks associated with fixed price projects. If you can't avoid fixed price then at least be smart about how you go about them.

My September 2007 column Agile on a Fixed Budget describes strategies for running agile projects for all combinations of fixing, or not fixing, the schedule, scope, and budget.

The Change Prevention Anti-Patternis described here.

Counteracting the False Arguments for Big Modeling Up Front (BMUF) describes the risks associated with detailed modeling early in a software development project.

Architecture Envisioning: An Agile Best Practice describes how to go about initial architecture modeling on an agile project in a streamlined manner.

Requirements Envisioning: An Agile Best Practice describes how to go about initial requirements modeling on an agile project in a streamlined manner.

I've summarized a collection of Agile project planning tips at www.ambysoft.com/essays/agileProjectPlanning.html

Iteration Negative One describes the portfolio management efforts which occur before the "start" of a software development project to select the right projects and get initial funding for them.

My Agility@Scale blog is posted at www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/page/ambler where I discuss strategies for adopting and applying agile strategies in complex environments.

Terms of Service | Privacy Statement | Copyright © 2024 UBM Tech, All rights reserved.