Mixing
How can i show our client that we need to build tools to reduce bugs and improve productivity [closed]
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I'm a software developer working outsourced to a client.
Currently our productivity is low due to lack of tools to automate recurring tasks, also due to the lack of common software base, each project is almost done from scratch or code is copied from previous projects.
For example, to update an existing webservice generated classes it can take up to 15 minutes, because the process is clumbersome and complex.It should take 2 mins max.
The customer mindset is, "i don't care how it's done as long as it works" and also very resistant to change.
Although we have freedom we still have deadlines specified by the customer's department. Only a couple of developers are worried but we have a lot a work to do and developing these things take time, the department should be concerned about these things and schedule time for these developments.It doesn't happened due to the established mindset.
How can we show that we need to develope these tools, methodologies or even have a manager or someone more dedicated to these subject s in order to make everything work well and improve our productivity?
communication productivity software-development
asked May 25 '16 at 16:01
Carlos Ferreira
1135
closed as off-topic by gnat, IDrinkandIKnowThings, Dawny33, Lilienthal♦, Chris E May 26 '16 at 20:21
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "Real questions have answers. Rather than explaining why your situation is terrible, or why your boss/coworker makes you unhappy, explain what you want to do to make it better. For more information, click here." – gnat, Dawny33
 |Â
show 2 more comments
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I'm a software developer working outsourced to a client.
Currently our productivity is low due to lack of tools to automate recurring tasks, also due to the lack of common software base, each project is almost done from scratch or code is copied from previous projects.
For example, to update an existing webservice generated classes it can take up to 15 minutes, because the process is clumbersome and complex.It should take 2 mins max.
The customer mindset is, "i don't care how it's done as long as it works" and also very resistant to change.
Although we have freedom we still have deadlines specified by the customer's department. Only a couple of developers are worried but we have a lot a work to do and developing these things take time, the department should be concerned about these things and schedule time for these developments.It doesn't happened due to the established mindset.
How can we show that we need to develope these tools, methodologies or even have a manager or someone more dedicated to these subject s in order to make everything work well and improve our productivity?
communication productivity software-development
asked May 25 '16 at 16:01
Carlos Ferreira
1135
closed as off-topic by gnat, IDrinkandIKnowThings, Dawny33, Lilienthal♦, Chris E May 26 '16 at 20:21
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "Real questions have answers. Rather than explaining why your situation is terrible, or why your boss/coworker makes you unhappy, explain what you want to do to make it better. For more information, click here." – gnat, Dawny33
1
I don't understand why this has been downvoted.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 17:01
What do you mean you have no manager? Even if you don't use this title, someone must be performing the equivalent role. Is that you?
– Brandin
May 25 '16 at 17:02
It means there's a bunch of developers in the room that make code, each on their own way, each one can make builds on jenkins so later the batch process deploys the jenkin's builds and that's it. There's no one responsible, or at least with the job of making sure that everything is ok. Developers code, build and ship. We have people that have business knowledge,we have other teams that we interact with, but on our team, the team that develops the end product, there's no one responsible for the whole team.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 17:07
2
It sounds like the real problem is lack of leadership. This is not something to address with a client, but rather within.
– Brandin
May 25 '16 at 17:27
We still have deadlines to accomplish.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 21:23
 |Â
show 2 more comments
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I'm a software developer working outsourced to a client.
Currently our productivity is low due to lack of tools to automate recurring tasks, also due to the lack of common software base, each project is almost done from scratch or code is copied from previous projects.
For example, to update an existing webservice generated classes it can take up to 15 minutes, because the process is clumbersome and complex.It should take 2 mins max.
The customer mindset is, "i don't care how it's done as long as it works" and also very resistant to change.
Although we have freedom we still have deadlines specified by the customer's department. Only a couple of developers are worried but we have a lot a work to do and developing these things take time, the department should be concerned about these things and schedule time for these developments.It doesn't happened due to the established mindset.
How can we show that we need to develope these tools, methodologies or even have a manager or someone more dedicated to these subject s in order to make everything work well and improve our productivity?
communication productivity software-development
asked May 25 '16 at 16:01
Carlos Ferreira
1135
I'm a software developer working outsourced to a client.
Currently our productivity is low due to lack of tools to automate recurring tasks, also due to the lack of common software base, each project is almost done from scratch or code is copied from previous projects.
For example, to update an existing webservice generated classes it can take up to 15 minutes, because the process is clumbersome and complex.It should take 2 mins max.
The customer mindset is, "i don't care how it's done as long as it works" and also very resistant to change.
Although we have freedom we still have deadlines specified by the customer's department. Only a couple of developers are worried but we have a lot a work to do and developing these things take time, the department should be concerned about these things and schedule time for these developments.It doesn't happened due to the established mindset.
How can we show that we need to develope these tools, methodologies or even have a manager or someone more dedicated to these subject s in order to make everything work well and improve our productivity?
communication productivity software-development
asked May 25 '16 at 16:01
Carlos Ferreira
1135
edited May 25 '16 at 21:22
asked May 25 '16 at 16:01
Carlos Ferreira
1135
asked May 25 '16 at 16:01
Carlos Ferreira
1135
asked May 25 '16 at 16:01
Carlos Ferreira
1135
1135
closed as off-topic by gnat, IDrinkandIKnowThings, Dawny33, Lilienthal♦, Chris E May 26 '16 at 20:21
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "Real questions have answers. Rather than explaining why your situation is terrible, or why your boss/coworker makes you unhappy, explain what you want to do to make it better. For more information, click here." – gnat, Dawny33
closed as off-topic by gnat, IDrinkandIKnowThings, Dawny33, Lilienthal♦, Chris E May 26 '16 at 20:21
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "Real questions have answers. Rather than explaining why your situation is terrible, or why your boss/coworker makes you unhappy, explain what you want to do to make it better. For more information, click here." – gnat, Dawny33
1
I don't understand why this has been downvoted.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 17:01
What do you mean you have no manager? Even if you don't use this title, someone must be performing the equivalent role. Is that you?
– Brandin
May 25 '16 at 17:02
It means there's a bunch of developers in the room that make code, each on their own way, each one can make builds on jenkins so later the batch process deploys the jenkin's builds and that's it. There's no one responsible, or at least with the job of making sure that everything is ok. Developers code, build and ship. We have people that have business knowledge,we have other teams that we interact with, but on our team, the team that develops the end product, there's no one responsible for the whole team.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 17:07
2
It sounds like the real problem is lack of leadership. This is not something to address with a client, but rather within.
– Brandin
May 25 '16 at 17:27
We still have deadlines to accomplish.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 21:23
 |Â
show 2 more comments
1
I don't understand why this has been downvoted.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 17:01
What do you mean you have no manager? Even if you don't use this title, someone must be performing the equivalent role. Is that you?
– Brandin
May 25 '16 at 17:02
It means there's a bunch of developers in the room that make code, each on their own way, each one can make builds on jenkins so later the batch process deploys the jenkin's builds and that's it. There's no one responsible, or at least with the job of making sure that everything is ok. Developers code, build and ship. We have people that have business knowledge,we have other teams that we interact with, but on our team, the team that develops the end product, there's no one responsible for the whole team.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 17:07
2
It sounds like the real problem is lack of leadership. This is not something to address with a client, but rather within.
– Brandin
May 25 '16 at 17:27
We still have deadlines to accomplish.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 21:23
1
1
I don't understand why this has been downvoted.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 17:01
I don't understand why this has been downvoted.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 17:01
What do you mean you have no manager? Even if you don't use this title, someone must be performing the equivalent role. Is that you?
– Brandin
May 25 '16 at 17:02
What do you mean you have no manager? Even if you don't use this title, someone must be performing the equivalent role. Is that you?
– Brandin
May 25 '16 at 17:02
It means there's a bunch of developers in the room that make code, each on their own way, each one can make builds on jenkins so later the batch process deploys the jenkin's builds and that's it. There's no one responsible, or at least with the job of making sure that everything is ok. Developers code, build and ship. We have people that have business knowledge,we have other teams that we interact with, but on our team, the team that develops the end product, there's no one responsible for the whole team.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 17:07
It means there's a bunch of developers in the room that make code, each on their own way, each one can make builds on jenkins so later the batch process deploys the jenkin's builds and that's it. There's no one responsible, or at least with the job of making sure that everything is ok. Developers code, build and ship. We have people that have business knowledge,we have other teams that we interact with, but on our team, the team that develops the end product, there's no one responsible for the whole team.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 17:07
2
2
It sounds like the real problem is lack of leadership. This is not something to address with a client, but rather within.
– Brandin
May 25 '16 at 17:27
It sounds like the real problem is lack of leadership. This is not something to address with a client, but rather within.
– Brandin
May 25 '16 at 17:27
We still have deadlines to accomplish.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 21:23
We still have deadlines to accomplish.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 21:23
 |Â
show 2 more comments
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
If you have been working like this for some time and limping along without a manager and proper hierarchy to make things more efficient then you can either
Live with it for your daily bread.
Get all the developers in to a consensus on how to do things and start using the tools that would streamline everything
Start your own business, do it properly, and steal the clients before someone else does.
Realistically everything that you have an issue with stems from not having a manager. If no one else has a problem with that, then you might be out of luck. I can also think of a scenario where it's beneficial for the company to continue doing things that way. If they partially calculate their billing based on developer hours for instance. Then the incentive to automate doesn't exist. There are companies who operate like this particularly if they have tied in clientele like govt departments etc,.
There is such a thing as 'automating yourself out of a job'. I've seen a new CEO come in, streamline a business to the point where they let half the staff go.
answered May 25 '16 at 20:03
Kilisi
94.5k50216376
Thank for your empathetic answer!I feel like you understand me. I just didn't understand the last part well. Streamlining can get me fired or other's? Is that what you mean?
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 21:31
It's not as common as it used to be, but yes. Here's an example, X amount of developers take Y amount of time to do a job. After streamlining Y amount of time is halved. You no longer need X amount of developers to do that work, so you can save money and get rid of some, it's one of the main reasons for automating. Same thing happens on assembly lines, 10 men get replaced by one man and a robot machine.
– Kilisi
May 25 '16 at 22:16
I'm old, I remember when whole offices full of people were being replaced by computers and photocopiers, and companies would let 50 typists go in one day.
– Kilisi
May 25 '16 at 22:22
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
0
down vote
You have to pick your battles. It sounds to me like this automation, while nice to have is not critical to the job getting done.
At my current job I have a list a mile long of things which would be nice to have. For example, time to rewrite the entire Shipping system using newer technologies. But realistically, even though it works poorly, it still works. From a business perspective it's simply not a priority - although as a developer I cringe whenever I look at that steaming pile of crap we call a system.
So either make your point from a business perspective:
By taking a week to do this now we will save X amount of time, and Y amount of money in the future.
Or learn to live without it.
answered May 25 '16 at 16:07
AndreiROM
44.1k21101173
Due to lake of automation and standardization we are more prone to make software bugs, so it's a little more than just a nice to have. In the business perspective, the company can be more competitve if i develop a product in one month instead of 6, the inefiency is that big... since only few (about 2 or 3) care about these problems, it looks like the problem doesn't exist.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 16:17
2
@Calbertoferreira - explain this to your bosses, not to me. As I said, most managers care about dollars and cents. Thoroughly explain how valuable your tools would be in the long run, and how much money it will save the company. That's the only way to capture their attention.
– AndreiROM
May 25 '16 at 16:20
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
0
down vote
If the customer is of the attitude "as long as it works, I don't care how it is done", why don't you develop the tools that you need on your own terms ?
I mean if something is taking, say 2 days to develop today, without the tools and you know this will repeat frequently, when you have 3 or 4 of these 2 day long tasks in your task plan, why don't you spend the first, say 5 days, to develop your tool and then using your tool, deploy the tasks faster. And the next time something similar comes in, you can impress the customer by delivering the results in a matter of hours or minutes, rather than the expected 2 days.
If the customer is as much hands-off type you made them sound to be, this should work.
answered May 25 '16 at 16:08
MelBurslan
7,00511123
Because we have scheduled tasks, if we spend time developing tools we need to justify that time. In other words the customer needs to acknowledge we need time to perform these tasks.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 16:12
To the department.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 19:11
Then it's the department you need to persuade, not the customer.
– DJClayworth
May 25 '16 at 20:15
The department doesn't care because at the the end it works, even if things take tons of time or bugs cripple in. I wanted them to see how wrong things are and how they can be improved but I'm not going to do anything without higher permission since I'm not the boss. I'm not going for such a huge effort knowing that other tasks can get delayed,it might come back and bite me despite my good intentions.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 21:29
suggest improvements |Â
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
If you have been working like this for some time and limping along without a manager and proper hierarchy to make things more efficient then you can either
Live with it for your daily bread.
Get all the developers in to a consensus on how to do things and start using the tools that would streamline everything
Start your own business, do it properly, and steal the clients before someone else does.
Realistically everything that you have an issue with stems from not having a manager. If no one else has a problem with that, then you might be out of luck. I can also think of a scenario where it's beneficial for the company to continue doing things that way. If they partially calculate their billing based on developer hours for instance. Then the incentive to automate doesn't exist. There are companies who operate like this particularly if they have tied in clientele like govt departments etc,.
There is such a thing as 'automating yourself out of a job'. I've seen a new CEO come in, streamline a business to the point where they let half the staff go.
answered May 25 '16 at 20:03
Kilisi
94.5k50216376
Thank for your empathetic answer!I feel like you understand me. I just didn't understand the last part well. Streamlining can get me fired or other's? Is that what you mean?
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 21:31
It's not as common as it used to be, but yes. Here's an example, X amount of developers take Y amount of time to do a job. After streamlining Y amount of time is halved. You no longer need X amount of developers to do that work, so you can save money and get rid of some, it's one of the main reasons for automating. Same thing happens on assembly lines, 10 men get replaced by one man and a robot machine.
– Kilisi
May 25 '16 at 22:16
I'm old, I remember when whole offices full of people were being replaced by computers and photocopiers, and companies would let 50 typists go in one day.
– Kilisi
May 25 '16 at 22:22
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
If you have been working like this for some time and limping along without a manager and proper hierarchy to make things more efficient then you can either
Live with it for your daily bread.
Get all the developers in to a consensus on how to do things and start using the tools that would streamline everything
Start your own business, do it properly, and steal the clients before someone else does.
Realistically everything that you have an issue with stems from not having a manager. If no one else has a problem with that, then you might be out of luck. I can also think of a scenario where it's beneficial for the company to continue doing things that way. If they partially calculate their billing based on developer hours for instance. Then the incentive to automate doesn't exist. There are companies who operate like this particularly if they have tied in clientele like govt departments etc,.
There is such a thing as 'automating yourself out of a job'. I've seen a new CEO come in, streamline a business to the point where they let half the staff go.
answered May 25 '16 at 20:03
Kilisi
94.5k50216376
Thank for your empathetic answer!I feel like you understand me. I just didn't understand the last part well. Streamlining can get me fired or other's? Is that what you mean?
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 21:31
It's not as common as it used to be, but yes. Here's an example, X amount of developers take Y amount of time to do a job. After streamlining Y amount of time is halved. You no longer need X amount of developers to do that work, so you can save money and get rid of some, it's one of the main reasons for automating. Same thing happens on assembly lines, 10 men get replaced by one man and a robot machine.
– Kilisi
May 25 '16 at 22:16
I'm old, I remember when whole offices full of people were being replaced by computers and photocopiers, and companies would let 50 typists go in one day.
– Kilisi
May 25 '16 at 22:22
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
If you have been working like this for some time and limping along without a manager and proper hierarchy to make things more efficient then you can either
Live with it for your daily bread.
Get all the developers in to a consensus on how to do things and start using the tools that would streamline everything
Start your own business, do it properly, and steal the clients before someone else does.
Realistically everything that you have an issue with stems from not having a manager. If no one else has a problem with that, then you might be out of luck. I can also think of a scenario where it's beneficial for the company to continue doing things that way. If they partially calculate their billing based on developer hours for instance. Then the incentive to automate doesn't exist. There are companies who operate like this particularly if they have tied in clientele like govt departments etc,.
There is such a thing as 'automating yourself out of a job'. I've seen a new CEO come in, streamline a business to the point where they let half the staff go.
answered May 25 '16 at 20:03
Kilisi
94.5k50216376
If you have been working like this for some time and limping along without a manager and proper hierarchy to make things more efficient then you can either
Live with it for your daily bread.
Get all the developers in to a consensus on how to do things and start using the tools that would streamline everything
Start your own business, do it properly, and steal the clients before someone else does.
Realistically everything that you have an issue with stems from not having a manager. If no one else has a problem with that, then you might be out of luck. I can also think of a scenario where it's beneficial for the company to continue doing things that way. If they partially calculate their billing based on developer hours for instance. Then the incentive to automate doesn't exist. There are companies who operate like this particularly if they have tied in clientele like govt departments etc,.
There is such a thing as 'automating yourself out of a job'. I've seen a new CEO come in, streamline a business to the point where they let half the staff go.
answered May 25 '16 at 20:03
Kilisi
94.5k50216376
edited May 25 '16 at 20:25
answered May 25 '16 at 20:03
Kilisi
94.5k50216376
answered May 25 '16 at 20:03
Kilisi
94.5k50216376
answered May 25 '16 at 20:03
Kilisi
94.5k50216376
94.5k50216376
Thank for your empathetic answer!I feel like you understand me. I just didn't understand the last part well. Streamlining can get me fired or other's? Is that what you mean?
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 21:31
It's not as common as it used to be, but yes. Here's an example, X amount of developers take Y amount of time to do a job. After streamlining Y amount of time is halved. You no longer need X amount of developers to do that work, so you can save money and get rid of some, it's one of the main reasons for automating. Same thing happens on assembly lines, 10 men get replaced by one man and a robot machine.
– Kilisi
May 25 '16 at 22:16
I'm old, I remember when whole offices full of people were being replaced by computers and photocopiers, and companies would let 50 typists go in one day.
– Kilisi
May 25 '16 at 22:22
suggest improvements |Â
Thank for your empathetic answer!I feel like you understand me. I just didn't understand the last part well. Streamlining can get me fired or other's? Is that what you mean?
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 21:31
It's not as common as it used to be, but yes. Here's an example, X amount of developers take Y amount of time to do a job. After streamlining Y amount of time is halved. You no longer need X amount of developers to do that work, so you can save money and get rid of some, it's one of the main reasons for automating. Same thing happens on assembly lines, 10 men get replaced by one man and a robot machine.
– Kilisi
May 25 '16 at 22:16
I'm old, I remember when whole offices full of people were being replaced by computers and photocopiers, and companies would let 50 typists go in one day.
– Kilisi
May 25 '16 at 22:22
Thank for your empathetic answer!I feel like you understand me. I just didn't understand the last part well. Streamlining can get me fired or other's? Is that what you mean?
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 21:31
Thank for your empathetic answer!I feel like you understand me. I just didn't understand the last part well. Streamlining can get me fired or other's? Is that what you mean?
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 21:31
It's not as common as it used to be, but yes. Here's an example, X amount of developers take Y amount of time to do a job. After streamlining Y amount of time is halved. You no longer need X amount of developers to do that work, so you can save money and get rid of some, it's one of the main reasons for automating. Same thing happens on assembly lines, 10 men get replaced by one man and a robot machine.
– Kilisi
May 25 '16 at 22:16
It's not as common as it used to be, but yes. Here's an example, X amount of developers take Y amount of time to do a job. After streamlining Y amount of time is halved. You no longer need X amount of developers to do that work, so you can save money and get rid of some, it's one of the main reasons for automating. Same thing happens on assembly lines, 10 men get replaced by one man and a robot machine.
– Kilisi
May 25 '16 at 22:16
I'm old, I remember when whole offices full of people were being replaced by computers and photocopiers, and companies would let 50 typists go in one day.
– Kilisi
May 25 '16 at 22:22
I'm old, I remember when whole offices full of people were being replaced by computers and photocopiers, and companies would let 50 typists go in one day.
– Kilisi
May 25 '16 at 22:22
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
0
down vote
You have to pick your battles. It sounds to me like this automation, while nice to have is not critical to the job getting done.
At my current job I have a list a mile long of things which would be nice to have. For example, time to rewrite the entire Shipping system using newer technologies. But realistically, even though it works poorly, it still works. From a business perspective it's simply not a priority - although as a developer I cringe whenever I look at that steaming pile of crap we call a system.
So either make your point from a business perspective:
By taking a week to do this now we will save X amount of time, and Y amount of money in the future.
Or learn to live without it.
answered May 25 '16 at 16:07
AndreiROM
44.1k21101173
Due to lake of automation and standardization we are more prone to make software bugs, so it's a little more than just a nice to have. In the business perspective, the company can be more competitve if i develop a product in one month instead of 6, the inefiency is that big... since only few (about 2 or 3) care about these problems, it looks like the problem doesn't exist.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 16:17
2
@Calbertoferreira - explain this to your bosses, not to me. As I said, most managers care about dollars and cents. Thoroughly explain how valuable your tools would be in the long run, and how much money it will save the company. That's the only way to capture their attention.
– AndreiROM
May 25 '16 at 16:20
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
0
down vote
You have to pick your battles. It sounds to me like this automation, while nice to have is not critical to the job getting done.
At my current job I have a list a mile long of things which would be nice to have. For example, time to rewrite the entire Shipping system using newer technologies. But realistically, even though it works poorly, it still works. From a business perspective it's simply not a priority - although as a developer I cringe whenever I look at that steaming pile of crap we call a system.
So either make your point from a business perspective:
By taking a week to do this now we will save X amount of time, and Y amount of money in the future.
Or learn to live without it.
answered May 25 '16 at 16:07
AndreiROM
44.1k21101173
Due to lake of automation and standardization we are more prone to make software bugs, so it's a little more than just a nice to have. In the business perspective, the company can be more competitve if i develop a product in one month instead of 6, the inefiency is that big... since only few (about 2 or 3) care about these problems, it looks like the problem doesn't exist.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 16:17
2
@Calbertoferreira - explain this to your bosses, not to me. As I said, most managers care about dollars and cents. Thoroughly explain how valuable your tools would be in the long run, and how much money it will save the company. That's the only way to capture their attention.
– AndreiROM
May 25 '16 at 16:20
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
You have to pick your battles. It sounds to me like this automation, while nice to have is not critical to the job getting done.
At my current job I have a list a mile long of things which would be nice to have. For example, time to rewrite the entire Shipping system using newer technologies. But realistically, even though it works poorly, it still works. From a business perspective it's simply not a priority - although as a developer I cringe whenever I look at that steaming pile of crap we call a system.
So either make your point from a business perspective:
By taking a week to do this now we will save X amount of time, and Y amount of money in the future.
Or learn to live without it.
answered May 25 '16 at 16:07
AndreiROM
44.1k21101173
You have to pick your battles. It sounds to me like this automation, while nice to have is not critical to the job getting done.
At my current job I have a list a mile long of things which would be nice to have. For example, time to rewrite the entire Shipping system using newer technologies. But realistically, even though it works poorly, it still works. From a business perspective it's simply not a priority - although as a developer I cringe whenever I look at that steaming pile of crap we call a system.
So either make your point from a business perspective:
By taking a week to do this now we will save X amount of time, and Y amount of money in the future.
Or learn to live without it.
answered May 25 '16 at 16:07
AndreiROM
44.1k21101173
answered May 25 '16 at 16:07
AndreiROM
44.1k21101173
answered May 25 '16 at 16:07
AndreiROM
44.1k21101173
answered May 25 '16 at 16:07
AndreiROM
44.1k21101173
44.1k21101173
Due to lake of automation and standardization we are more prone to make software bugs, so it's a little more than just a nice to have. In the business perspective, the company can be more competitve if i develop a product in one month instead of 6, the inefiency is that big... since only few (about 2 or 3) care about these problems, it looks like the problem doesn't exist.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 16:17
2
@Calbertoferreira - explain this to your bosses, not to me. As I said, most managers care about dollars and cents. Thoroughly explain how valuable your tools would be in the long run, and how much money it will save the company. That's the only way to capture their attention.
– AndreiROM
May 25 '16 at 16:20
suggest improvements |Â
Due to lake of automation and standardization we are more prone to make software bugs, so it's a little more than just a nice to have. In the business perspective, the company can be more competitve if i develop a product in one month instead of 6, the inefiency is that big... since only few (about 2 or 3) care about these problems, it looks like the problem doesn't exist.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 16:17
2
@Calbertoferreira - explain this to your bosses, not to me. As I said, most managers care about dollars and cents. Thoroughly explain how valuable your tools would be in the long run, and how much money it will save the company. That's the only way to capture their attention.
– AndreiROM
May 25 '16 at 16:20
Due to lake of automation and standardization we are more prone to make software bugs, so it's a little more than just a nice to have. In the business perspective, the company can be more competitve if i develop a product in one month instead of 6, the inefiency is that big... since only few (about 2 or 3) care about these problems, it looks like the problem doesn't exist.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 16:17
Due to lake of automation and standardization we are more prone to make software bugs, so it's a little more than just a nice to have. In the business perspective, the company can be more competitve if i develop a product in one month instead of 6, the inefiency is that big... since only few (about 2 or 3) care about these problems, it looks like the problem doesn't exist.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 16:17
2
2
@Calbertoferreira - explain this to your bosses, not to me. As I said, most managers care about dollars and cents. Thoroughly explain how valuable your tools would be in the long run, and how much money it will save the company. That's the only way to capture their attention.
– AndreiROM
May 25 '16 at 16:20
@Calbertoferreira - explain this to your bosses, not to me. As I said, most managers care about dollars and cents. Thoroughly explain how valuable your tools would be in the long run, and how much money it will save the company. That's the only way to capture their attention.
– AndreiROM
May 25 '16 at 16:20
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
0
down vote
If the customer is of the attitude "as long as it works, I don't care how it is done", why don't you develop the tools that you need on your own terms ?
I mean if something is taking, say 2 days to develop today, without the tools and you know this will repeat frequently, when you have 3 or 4 of these 2 day long tasks in your task plan, why don't you spend the first, say 5 days, to develop your tool and then using your tool, deploy the tasks faster. And the next time something similar comes in, you can impress the customer by delivering the results in a matter of hours or minutes, rather than the expected 2 days.
If the customer is as much hands-off type you made them sound to be, this should work.
answered May 25 '16 at 16:08
MelBurslan
7,00511123
Because we have scheduled tasks, if we spend time developing tools we need to justify that time. In other words the customer needs to acknowledge we need time to perform these tasks.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 16:12
To the department.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 19:11
Then it's the department you need to persuade, not the customer.
– DJClayworth
May 25 '16 at 20:15
The department doesn't care because at the the end it works, even if things take tons of time or bugs cripple in. I wanted them to see how wrong things are and how they can be improved but I'm not going to do anything without higher permission since I'm not the boss. I'm not going for such a huge effort knowing that other tasks can get delayed,it might come back and bite me despite my good intentions.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 21:29
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
0
down vote
If the customer is of the attitude "as long as it works, I don't care how it is done", why don't you develop the tools that you need on your own terms ?
I mean if something is taking, say 2 days to develop today, without the tools and you know this will repeat frequently, when you have 3 or 4 of these 2 day long tasks in your task plan, why don't you spend the first, say 5 days, to develop your tool and then using your tool, deploy the tasks faster. And the next time something similar comes in, you can impress the customer by delivering the results in a matter of hours or minutes, rather than the expected 2 days.
If the customer is as much hands-off type you made them sound to be, this should work.
answered May 25 '16 at 16:08
MelBurslan
7,00511123
Because we have scheduled tasks, if we spend time developing tools we need to justify that time. In other words the customer needs to acknowledge we need time to perform these tasks.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 16:12
To the department.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 19:11
Then it's the department you need to persuade, not the customer.
– DJClayworth
May 25 '16 at 20:15
The department doesn't care because at the the end it works, even if things take tons of time or bugs cripple in. I wanted them to see how wrong things are and how they can be improved but I'm not going to do anything without higher permission since I'm not the boss. I'm not going for such a huge effort knowing that other tasks can get delayed,it might come back and bite me despite my good intentions.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 21:29
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
If the customer is of the attitude "as long as it works, I don't care how it is done", why don't you develop the tools that you need on your own terms ?
I mean if something is taking, say 2 days to develop today, without the tools and you know this will repeat frequently, when you have 3 or 4 of these 2 day long tasks in your task plan, why don't you spend the first, say 5 days, to develop your tool and then using your tool, deploy the tasks faster. And the next time something similar comes in, you can impress the customer by delivering the results in a matter of hours or minutes, rather than the expected 2 days.
If the customer is as much hands-off type you made them sound to be, this should work.
answered May 25 '16 at 16:08
MelBurslan
7,00511123
If the customer is of the attitude "as long as it works, I don't care how it is done", why don't you develop the tools that you need on your own terms ?
I mean if something is taking, say 2 days to develop today, without the tools and you know this will repeat frequently, when you have 3 or 4 of these 2 day long tasks in your task plan, why don't you spend the first, say 5 days, to develop your tool and then using your tool, deploy the tasks faster. And the next time something similar comes in, you can impress the customer by delivering the results in a matter of hours or minutes, rather than the expected 2 days.
If the customer is as much hands-off type you made them sound to be, this should work.
answered May 25 '16 at 16:08
MelBurslan
7,00511123
answered May 25 '16 at 16:08
MelBurslan
7,00511123
answered May 25 '16 at 16:08
MelBurslan
7,00511123
answered May 25 '16 at 16:08
MelBurslan
7,00511123
7,00511123
Because we have scheduled tasks, if we spend time developing tools we need to justify that time. In other words the customer needs to acknowledge we need time to perform these tasks.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 16:12
To the department.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 19:11
Then it's the department you need to persuade, not the customer.
– DJClayworth
May 25 '16 at 20:15
The department doesn't care because at the the end it works, even if things take tons of time or bugs cripple in. I wanted them to see how wrong things are and how they can be improved but I'm not going to do anything without higher permission since I'm not the boss. I'm not going for such a huge effort knowing that other tasks can get delayed,it might come back and bite me despite my good intentions.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 21:29
suggest improvements |Â
Because we have scheduled tasks, if we spend time developing tools we need to justify that time. In other words the customer needs to acknowledge we need time to perform these tasks.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 16:12
To the department.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 19:11
Then it's the department you need to persuade, not the customer.
– DJClayworth
May 25 '16 at 20:15
The department doesn't care because at the the end it works, even if things take tons of time or bugs cripple in. I wanted them to see how wrong things are and how they can be improved but I'm not going to do anything without higher permission since I'm not the boss. I'm not going for such a huge effort knowing that other tasks can get delayed,it might come back and bite me despite my good intentions.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 21:29
Because we have scheduled tasks, if we spend time developing tools we need to justify that time. In other words the customer needs to acknowledge we need time to perform these tasks.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 16:12
Because we have scheduled tasks, if we spend time developing tools we need to justify that time. In other words the customer needs to acknowledge we need time to perform these tasks.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 16:12
To the department.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 19:11
To the department.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 19:11
Then it's the department you need to persuade, not the customer.
– DJClayworth
May 25 '16 at 20:15
Then it's the department you need to persuade, not the customer.
– DJClayworth
May 25 '16 at 20:15
The department doesn't care because at the the end it works, even if things take tons of time or bugs cripple in. I wanted them to see how wrong things are and how they can be improved but I'm not going to do anything without higher permission since I'm not the boss. I'm not going for such a huge effort knowing that other tasks can get delayed,it might come back and bite me despite my good intentions.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 21:29
The department doesn't care because at the the end it works, even if things take tons of time or bugs cripple in. I wanted them to see how wrong things are and how they can be improved but I'm not going to do anything without higher permission since I'm not the boss. I'm not going for such a huge effort knowing that other tasks can get delayed,it might come back and bite me despite my good intentions.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 21:29
suggest improvements |Â
1
I don't understand why this has been downvoted.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 17:01
What do you mean you have no manager? Even if you don't use this title, someone must be performing the equivalent role. Is that you?
– Brandin
May 25 '16 at 17:02
It means there's a bunch of developers in the room that make code, each on their own way, each one can make builds on jenkins so later the batch process deploys the jenkin's builds and that's it. There's no one responsible, or at least with the job of making sure that everything is ok. Developers code, build and ship. We have people that have business knowledge,we have other teams that we interact with, but on our team, the team that develops the end product, there's no one responsible for the whole team.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 17:07
2
It sounds like the real problem is lack of leadership. This is not something to address with a client, but rather within.
– Brandin
May 25 '16 at 17:27
We still have deadlines to accomplish.
– Carlos Ferreira
May 25 '16 at 21:23