Re^2: Non-Technical Factors

I find it difficult to believe that "Competent Staff" ranks so low. I also find it interesting (not necessarily good or bad) that this list seems to support what's currently en vogue as far as development methodologies go. That is to say, the above table looks an aweful lot like a checklist for agile methods.

thor

Feel the white light, the light within Be your own disciple, fan the sparks of will For all of us waiting, your kingdom will come

Comment on Re^2: Non-Technical Factors

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Non-Technical Factors by adrianh (Chancellor) on Jul 08, 2005 at 16:45 UTC
I find it difficult to believe that "Competent Staff" ranks so low. Even with the very best people most projects will foul up without user involvement, management support, decent requirements, etc. That is to say, the above table looks an aweful lot like a checklist for agile methods More like a list of the things that agile methodologies try and address. For example the agile-folk approach to getting a "Clear Statement of Requirements" is rather different from that of the non-agile folk :-)	[reply]
Re^3: Non-Technical Factors by rob_au (Abbot) on Jul 08, 2005 at 12:26 UTC
It is worth reminding that this is a list of relative importance of the identified factors - Nothing on this list should be considered as unimportant in the success of an IT project, but rather the weighting is a reflection of relative importance within these factors alone. It should be noted too that none of these factors are methodology specific - Indeed some of these success factors have been identified by other contributors to this thread and are consistent across not only software development methodologies, but also distinct project management and risk management methodologies. `perl -le "print unpack'N', pack'B32', '00000000000000000000001000000000'"`	[reply]