Stephen Cameron <> wrote:
> That tendering for software is flawed,
> I am looking for a clear explanation of why.
In all my years as an architect, developer, manager and designer, I'd
say it'a this; the specs / requirements are wrong.
Of course we can create software exactly as prescribed, that's a
no-brainer for most professional companies. What's *not* a given, and
what causes the majority of the problems, are all those things in the
requirements and specs that are simply not the ones that are needed
nor wanted, some times the completely wrong model, or the process
governing the data is wrong, or it's requiring data that doesn't
exists or is woefully bad, other times it's because the people in
charge of requirements aren't business savvy, maybe the geeks are put
to draw up some business process, or by thinking in big chunks lots of
little subtle but important bits are missed, overlooked, ignored and
so on. But requirements are bad, all the same.
In most places I've poked my fingers into various pies in my capacity
as a technologist, I'd say that most requirements are bad because they
have hidden processes and models behind them not being made explicit.
Some times they're like that because of incompetence, but I'd say
mostly it's either because a) isn't it obvious?, or b) we can't reveal
business-sensitive information like that!, or c) this is the way we do
things around here ... without any of these options being close to
what is needed, nor the truth, at the cost we all know and get
frustrated and angry about.
My 2 bob,
Cheers,
Alex
