This is exactly where I start the initial investigation, Doug.  Except 
that I think of it in terms of "client investment" rather than risk.  
That is:

Lowest Risk = Existing Client Involvement, including Automation.  This 
client says things like, "We have this system that was built in dBase 
III+.  It works well, but we need to have something web-based."

Medium Risk = Existing Client Involvement without Automation.  This 
client says things like, "We've done this for years on paper, but 
everyone says we could do it better with computers."

Highest Risk = No Client Involvement.  This client says things like, "I 
heard about this idea at a trade show..."

I don't like talking about risk much with the client.  It's good to 
acknowledge risk, but not dwell on it.
- Jeff


On Tuesday, March 26, 2002, at 10:44 AM, Douglas Smith wrote:

>
> I was thinking about modeling business processes in a prototype, and I 
> realized that there are several "levels of modeling risk" as I am 
> calling them.  They reflect client familiarity with their own 
> processes, and how much effort needs to go into prototyping in order to 
> get clear and sufficient feedback from the client.  It strikes me that 
> processes that have higher risk should be budgeted much more time 
> during prototyping.
>
> I was wondering if anybody here would be interested in a conversation 
> about how they fit into prototyping and FLiP.  I would be interested in 
> any philosophical and real-life observations.
>
> 1) Lowest Risk.  The business process is already modeled in an existing 
> computer system that is being converted (to fusebox, for example).  The 
> client is already familiar with computer screens and steps they need to 
> take to get from A to B.  They can easily give meaningful and accurate 
> advise to the programmer on exactly how they they think the new system 
> should operate.  That does not mean that the old system did things the 
> most efficient way.  You may very well want to convince the client to 
> do things slightly differently.  However, it does mean that the client 
> has a clear understanding of the process as it is implemented by the 
> software, and won't need much education and guidance.
>
> 2) Medium Risk.  The business process is already modeled in 
> non-software office processes and paper work, but is not modeled in any 
> computerized system or software, or is partially computerized, in 
> spreadsheets, for example.  The customer knows what data they want to 
> get out of the system, and they often know what they want their reports 
> to look like, but they are more at the mercy of the programmer when it 
> comes to getting that data into the system in a user-friendly way.
>
> 3) Highest Risk.  The business process not directly modeled in the 
> client's office environment.   The customer knows of some similar 
> system that does what they want, or knows about some of the potential 
> types of data that could be extracted from the system, but cannot give 
> clear and immediate feedback on what they really want.  The client is 
> absolutely at the mercy of the programmer and the prototyping process 
> to produce something that is meaningful.  In my opinion, you should 
> educate the client that these types of system will *almost always* 
> require follow up releases of the software down the road, as since they 
> can't know all the limitations or possibilities of the system until 
> they actually start using it.  In other words, even with all the 
> amazing things that prototyping can do, it may very well not solve all 
> their problems.  Also, maybe role-playing with a paper or manual 
> solution, simulating the data flow and output,  would be a way to do 
> "real world prototyping" before any software-based prototyping is done.
>
> Of course, actual software system are often contain a mixture of 
> elements with different levels of modeling.  My main point is that the 
> higher the risk, the more you need to make sure the client is 
> intensively involved in the prototyping process.  Also, you will need 
> to to budget or estimate more time/money up front for the higher risk 
> items.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ================================================
> Douglas M. Smith - Application Architect
> TeraTech - Tools for Programmers(tm) - www.TeraTech.com
> [EMAIL PROTECTED], ICQ: 41044319
> ================================================
>
>
>

==^================================================================
This email was sent to: [email protected]

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?bUrFMa.bV0Kx9
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^================================================================


Reply via email to