I'm not clear whether when the designs were considered early on if he
brought them to you and now he's trying to run and end-around, or if he
never brought them to you and you considered the same ideas generated from
within your team. I think that's an important difference and would tend to
affect one's choice of approach.

Of all the posts I have to agree most with Todd who just weighed in.

I have found that often people on the business side feel that they
understand what the customer wants better than anyone - and often they are
right! Trouble comes when, instead of articulating the gap between need and
application, they propose solutions. I agree with the person who recommended
trying to dig deeper to find out if there is something your team might have
missed that this person can't express except in software terms. I'd also dig
for sales/marketing concerns - often people are driven by what they think
will demo well for the people who write the checks. They can sometimes be
convinced by arguing from adoption effectiveness (how it will reflect on
your company if the customers' stakeholders can't get their software adopted
by actual users).

I have to say starting by flattering this person's initiative etc., then
moving into additional veiled steps during all of which the hidden agenda is
to deflect his input without him thinking that's what your doing, is an
approach that can backfire. If you can't carry out that conversation with
sincerity and respect, don't have it. He'll know you're partronizing him,
and if he has any power at all will only be motivated to bring in even
bigger guns.

Leading with the positive undermines the first message with the subsequent
criticism. This breeds distrust rather than strengthening the relationship.
Lead with the bad news, then enlist his help to resolve the problem. I have
found this to be more effective than leading with conciliatory expressions,
especially when I can't summon the necessary sincerity to deliver them
effectively.

My 2 cents.

Faith

-- 
Faith Peterson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

On Dec 13, 2007 5:37 PM, D E <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>
> Here's a work/process/confrontation scenario for the group that some of
> you may have experience with, and I'm seeking advice on.
> <snip>
> The challenge is how to approach the PM without feeling like we're laying
> the smack down. We want to keep these kind of ideas flowing through the
> team, but we can't have folks inserting their hand at random points in the
> project time line. I feel like directly talking to the PM in question and
> explaining the issues could help, but I also think his/her invested time
> could mean difficulty in dealing with them.
>
> So how do you react to this? What would be your plan of action? Thoughts?
>
>
________________________________________________________________
*Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah*
February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA
Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/

________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help

Reply via email to