OK, how about "Process Modeling Levels" or "Current Modeling Levels". I agree with you that talking in terms of risk to the client can generally turn them off.
At 02:02 PM 3/26/02 -0500, you wrote: >As mentioned before, I wonder if there isn't a way of rewording this to make >it more palatable for the client. Something like "Current Process Level" or >"Automation Level". That way we can speak to the client, making them aware >of the true requirements need early, and with more certainty. > >Tim Heald >ACP/CCFD :) >Application Development >www.schoollink.net > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Douglas Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 1:23 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: Levels of Modeling Risks and FLiP > > > > > > Yes, I am thinking mostly in terms of giving ourselves (the > > developer/architect) a better heads-up as to what we are getting > > ourselves > > into, so the prototyping goes smoother, and how to better estimate the > > time/costs, so the client is prepared to pay. > > > > At 12:14 PM 3/26/02 -0500, you wrote: > > >I don't like talking about risk much with the client. It's good to > > >acknowledge risk, but not dwell on it. > > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________ > >Do You Yahoo!? > >Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > > > ==^================================================================ 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 ==^================================================================
