by Karl E. Wiegers, (Process Impact) and Johanna Rothman. [This paper was originally published in Software Development, February 2001. It is reprinted (with modifications) with permission from Software Development magazine.] Pat, a vice-president in an Internet start-up company, was proud of her team’s previous product release but concerned about why it had shipped a few weeks
“No Fred, we’re not considering you for that promotion. You’re too valuable where you are.” How many of us have heard those words, or said them at least once to our staff? Sometimes, we use the “too valuable” phrase to avoid discussing problems with a staff member, problems you can bring out in the open
© 2001 Johanna Rothman “New England high tech jobs going unfilled” — headline in a recent Boston Globe “If you have more open requisitions than candidates, hire the ones who can breathe.” — Jerry Weinberg, private conversation Even the popular press has caught on to the software “crisis” of not enough people. The Globe reporter
by Johanna Rothman. This article was originally published in October 2000, on catapulse.com During software projects, you can hear widely different attitudes toward fixing defects, depending upon priorities and motivations: “We’ll fix that when we have time. In the meantime, just keep developing! How can you possibly tell how much it will cost to fix
© 2000 Johanna Rothman. This paper first appeared in Software Quality Professional, Volume 2, #3, June 2000. INTRODUCTION Software publishers create commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) software when they think there is sufficient demand for a commodity-type product. By avoiding custom software development, these publishers can create an economy of scale, increasing the likelihood of profitability. Some
by Johanna Rothman. Originally published in Cutter’s Business-IT Alignment E-Mail Advisor, April 26, 2000. In response to Jim Highsmith’s Business-IT Strategies E-Mail Advisor of 1 March, “Change Is Changing,” I’d like to ask: Is the Internet really changing everything? I’m not so sure. In the 14 February issue of Business Week, there was a fascinating
If this month’s guest column strikes a familiar chord with you, welcome to the club. We have all been there. Caught in the maelstrom of unrealistic requirements and damnable deadlines, we grab for whatever tactic looks like it might keep us afloat. More often than not, we start putting in longer hours and expect everyone
© 2000 Johanna Rothman. This article was originally published in Software Testing and Quality Engineering, March/April 2000. Many of us have worked in test groups in which we felt as if we didn’t have enough time, hardware, or staff to do the work. In those situations it’s hard to escape the feeling that while somebody might be in
by Johanna Rothman. Originally published in Cutter’s Business-IT Alignment E-Mail Advisor, February 2, 2000. A number of IT alignment issues are related to the difficulties in hiring staff. Let’s assume you’re in “constant hiring” mode — you continually get resumes, interview people, and decide on whether to hire various candidates. But are you asking questions
© 2000 Johanna Rothman. You’re not going to meet schedule. Maybe requirements have taken longer. Perhaps in the middle of implementation, you uncover something requiring redesign. Maybe the developers haven’t met one milestone yet and you’re worried about the test time. What do you do? The first slip is the initial indication that something is