Product had missed go-live target multiple times, customer was irate, and intent on clawing back money from budget and a change order request was issued.
Main Problems Identified During Assessment Interview
- Team that initially met with customer after the SOW was executed, did not document initial product requirements in a timely fashion
- Gaps in the requirements elicitation process led to a non-scalable architecture choice
- Project team was not staffed correctly
- There was no defined methodology
- The non-scalable architecture led to improper implementation
- The Dev Team was in disarray from issues with requirements
- QA team could not build adequate test cases
- Product was not tested to client specification
- Infrequent communication between the Dev Team, the BA, and the Customer
On this particular project there was a cascading effect of mishandling the initiation phase with the customer. Being more diligent in the elicitation would have largely mitigated the issues that hampered the project. The result was the product not shipping, the business losing money and credibility in the client’s eyes.
- Team was open to a tailored Agile methodology training specific to these issues.
- After a new change order request, the product requirement elicitation was revisited with a better structured team.
- The new team was staffed with the consideration of experience in scalable platforms that would satisfy the customer product needs. Another consideration in staffing the new team was of course the new CO budget(Optimistic and Pessimistic).
- The new team had an Agile working agreement that increased communication and feedback in collaboration with the customer in order to make sure that the product was in-line with expectations.
- The QA team created better test cases from better product requirements, in turn improving product quality moved to UAT.
- The estimation technique was switched to reflect team maturity
Result and Lessons Learned
A change in methodology and outside training, helped the team uncover issues that were not immediately visible thus saving the team’s reputation to the customer. Further, the team replicated the changes across other projects and enjoyed the improved customer satisfaction while avoiding similar project issues. The turnaround resulted in delivering a working product after months of failing to go live!