> Brendan Reardon replyed to a post:
> > In response to your post, I have found a common theme amongst all of the
> > clients that I have worked with. Keep It Simple Stupid!
<snip />
> > As an example, I created a workflow for a client that has 7 steps in the
> > process to get their website copy out to production, on the insistance of
> > the group. I went back to the client two months later and created an
> > alternative workflow with three steps to get to production. They no longer
> > use the 7 step process.
I have had a similar experience with one customer where the workflow
technology (WfCM model) opened up all sorts of possibilities that
sounded great -- lots of alternate paths, lots of QA, lots of review
activities -- but the solution was perceived as too much of a straight
jacket and only delayed the process the business sought to improve.
This was a case of new activities being imposed existing work
practices.
On the other hand, another customer that authors Legislation, had quite
a complex existing manual process that needed to be tracked with a
complex workflow. These folk are still using the same Process
Definitions that were defined 5 years ago (with a few minor tweaks.)
I guess that the lesson is to really look hard at the existing work
patterns and understand the problems that are to be solved -- is the
workflow to improve Quality or decrease process times?
Often a linear workflow that simply reacts to the status of a document
is all a business really needs.
Then michael kimsal wrote:
> So, when doing work that someone has brought you in to do,
> do you give them what they want or what they need? Do you
> work software around a business, or rework the business around
> the software?`
> It's maddeningly frustrating to tell a client X yet they
> keep insisting on Y ("we know our business better than outsiders")
> then 3-6-9 months later come back and demand X, often
> as if it was their idea.
If the customer comes back with your idea as if it was theirs, I would
call that an excellent result! (Ideally though, you want to get paid
for having the idea in the first place! :-) Half the battle introducing
new technology is getting the customer to own the solution and the
change that the solution brings. Interesting point to raise, I'm sure
that many CMS implements face this kind of problem daily.
Cheers,
Dave.
---
David Lane ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
InQuirion Pty. Ltd.
Makers of the TeraText(tm) Database System (http://www.teratext.com/)
Level 3, 110 Victoria St, Carlton 3053, VIC Australia.
Ph: +61 3 9925 4166 Fax: +61 3 9925 4098
Web: http://www.inquirion.com/ http://www.mds.rmit.edu.au/
---
--
http://cms-list.org/
trim your replies for good karma.
