Bad solutioning
I should had do my own analysis when he assign the request to me. But I didn't. I just simply follow his solutioning. Bad move.
I thought I've completed the request. Did some sample testing and send the test results to him. Few hours later, he came to me and told me that I didn't cover 1 portion. I was like.... huh? How come it wasn't mentioned in your solutioning?
This is when I knew that I have to analyze this request by myself too. I look thru the documentations and study the requirements. That was when I notice a major problem.
The initial solutioning was to split the entire request into 2 portion. The 1st portion, which is the 1 that I've just completed, is easier and much faster to do. The 2nd portion is a lot harder and require more time to complete. The plan is to promote the 1st portion into production first, then do the 2nd portion and promote it at later date.
But by splitting the request into 2 parts, he has unknowingly complicated the whole process by 10 times. There are more things that need to be handled. More steps by users when they go about their daily task. More room for people to make error.
By spliting the request into 2 parts, we save some efforts. But its not worth it. It make the whole thing look too complicated. All that just to save some effort? I wouldn't do this kind of solutioning.
Spend quite some time to explain the whole issue to the requester, telling him that it is not a good idea to split the request into 2 parts. I asked if it is ok to delay part 1 to promote together when part 2 is ready. He said he need to raise this issue to his boss before giving us the answer. Seriously, I won't take a no as an answer. There is just too much risk involved by splitting up the request.
I can't entirely blame him for the bad solutioning. I should had analyze the request beforehand. But I'm just fed up that I have to go thru all the trouble to correct a bad solution given.
I thought I've completed the request. Did some sample testing and send the test results to him. Few hours later, he came to me and told me that I didn't cover 1 portion. I was like.... huh? How come it wasn't mentioned in your solutioning?
This is when I knew that I have to analyze this request by myself too. I look thru the documentations and study the requirements. That was when I notice a major problem.
The initial solutioning was to split the entire request into 2 portion. The 1st portion, which is the 1 that I've just completed, is easier and much faster to do. The 2nd portion is a lot harder and require more time to complete. The plan is to promote the 1st portion into production first, then do the 2nd portion and promote it at later date.
But by splitting the request into 2 parts, he has unknowingly complicated the whole process by 10 times. There are more things that need to be handled. More steps by users when they go about their daily task. More room for people to make error.
By spliting the request into 2 parts, we save some efforts. But its not worth it. It make the whole thing look too complicated. All that just to save some effort? I wouldn't do this kind of solutioning.
Spend quite some time to explain the whole issue to the requester, telling him that it is not a good idea to split the request into 2 parts. I asked if it is ok to delay part 1 to promote together when part 2 is ready. He said he need to raise this issue to his boss before giving us the answer. Seriously, I won't take a no as an answer. There is just too much risk involved by splitting up the request.
I can't entirely blame him for the bad solutioning. I should had analyze the request beforehand. But I'm just fed up that I have to go thru all the trouble to correct a bad solution given.
I bet we all learn from experience right?
Posted by
Anonymous |
11/16/2006 07:10:00 PM
Ya. I've learnt to always analyse something even if my sub teamlead has the solutioning already.
Posted by
DK |
11/17/2006 01:08:00 AM