The Software Project Model is Broken

The Software Project Model is Broken

Yes, I went with a provocative headline to grab your attention.  It must have worked because you are reading this.  So don’t stop now - let me put some ideas forth to stimulate discussion and thinking. 

First of all, I’m not the only person who thinks that this headline has some merit.  My friend Chris Sheridan posted on this topic last year.  Other very smart people have also published pieces declaring the project model dead.  There is a “#NoProjects” hashtag on Twitter.  (Because you need a hashtag for a movement like this)  So I’m definitely not alone and completely off the ranch with this thought. 

There are two fundamental issues that we are seeing with the concept of “software projects”, especially as they exist in today’s world of agile software development.  Perhaps the concept of a “project” fits far better with a waterfall approach, but as our industry transitions to agile development, the concept of a project starts to confuse the situation.

First and foremost, software – and especially custom software – is often not thought of as a long-term investment in a capability or service.  It’s most often viewed as a large one-time expense to the business, because it’s typically fairly expensive to pay for during initial development of the product.  (Note: I’m ignoring the financial perspective of this via a cap-ex model.)

Secondly, projects (of any type) by their very nature are defined to have a beginning and an end, and are temporary.  Even the Project Management Institute defines projects this way.  So why are these two concepts causing issues?  Let’s explore…

Why do we use software in business?  There are several subtly different reasons, but at the end of the day, it is either to enhance productivity and drive down costs, or to provide a service or capability to customers to generate revenue.  And to be competitive today, companies need to provide a continuous flow of new value to customers.     

We already know that software is not a one-time investment…it’s like a pet.  Yes, you pick it up from the shelter, get a leash, get some food, pay for a vaccination, buy a bed and some toys, and quickly you are out $500…and then you buy food every week for the next 12 years…pay thousands in vet bills…buy hundreds of dollars of toys…pay hundreds in boarding fees over the lifetime of the pet.  So while you think you have a high initial investment, you actually end up paying far more over the lifetime of the pet than you did when you got home with them.  It’s very much the same with software.  While the initial investment to get that first product out the door seems high, it is going to be less than the ongoing investment.  Yet we focus on the cost of “the project” – that initial investment, and we often ignore the larger lifetime cost.  Companies also tend to ignore the competitive nature that innovative software solutions bring.  As I wrote earlier, to be competitive, companies need to continually invest in their solution to bring new features and capabilities to the market.  Projects with end dates don’t work well with the need to continuously provide value to customers.

This slides into the second issue: the end of a software product comes when the true end of its lifespan has arrived.  The end of a piece of software is not when the “project” is over – it is when that software is fully retired from service.  When it’s uninstalled from servers, removed from desktops and devices, and deleted from app catalogs.  Until then, it’s costing you money to run and maintain.  The end of a software “project” is when you want to stop investing in it – not when you reach some arbitrary or estimated date.          

So what are companies doing to re-think “projects”?  Companies doing innovative work in a continuous flow model have re-thought the concept of “projects” to an “investment streams” model.  We are seeing great success with organizations who have re-aligned their delivery teams by portfolio/product areas, which map to business investment streams. If there is a new capability or product your company wishes to invest in, it is smart to think about the level of investment that you are going to put into the capability over the life of it, from the first day to the last. After all, if it’s a great product, your users are going to be demanding additional capabilities – so don’t be stuck in a project mindset!

Srinivas Satya Vinnakota

Group Senior Consultant

8 年

Thanks Ryan for your views, though I disagree your concept as if the project and softare are both going down, if not loosing sheen. You touched upon business transformation and they have recognized that IT transformation will hit them because of service model changes and architectural complexities but sofyware, service and product as a service will continue to remain, exist and also be around for ever. They may not rule the industry as agile is more a type of working quicker these days with some adjustments that have become essential. Project as a word and entity will also remin as it is a logical group of people. assets, effort to acheive a common purpose and also give the batton to the next logical work unit. Perhaps ypur views are aimed at those businesses who are trying to cut costs at any cost, swamp the systems and design model with agile and newer techniques but I guess no body can shake the existence of service, project, product and an umbrella serving all these in a market flooded with anmes and terminologies. My view though.

回复
Sean Grace

Business Solutions Expert using the Power of Technology

8 年

Ryan, that's a great piece. You are correct if the software works the end user will demand more from it to make their work life easier.

回复
Steve Rubinow

Award-winning Chief Information and Technology Officer, global executive, strategist and transformation expert.

8 年

Long before there was an Agile Manifesto, I always considered the 3 categories of costs of any software "project" - start-up, ongoing (including market-driven enhancements) and exit, or to use the pet analogy - birth, growth and death (I wanted to use "retirement" instead of death but I don't think pets retire, but rather expire). Now I know I can call that decades old concept "continuous flow". Good to freshen up the nomenclature - gives one pause to think and not take anything for granted!

回复
Deema Dajani

Product Portfolio Strategy Leader and SAFe Fellow

8 年

Nice explanation Ryan Dorrell ! Many main stream organizations are shifting away from project based staffing and funding.

回复
Adam Ulery

Technology Leader Focusing on Strategy Execution, Increasing Value Flow, and Delivering Business Outcomes

8 年

I like the idea of thinking of the total investment over the life span of the capability. Business leaders should be approaching investment decisions with this in mind and those who aren't are missing a big piece of the picture.

要查看或添加评论,请登录

Ryan Dorrell的更多文章

  • Book Review: Building Machine Learning Powered Applications

    Book Review: Building Machine Learning Powered Applications

    Like many of you may have now, I have recently found myself with a bit of free time while waiting for the COVID-19…

    5 条评论
  • Books I Read :: v2019

    Books I Read :: v2019

    I love to read, and unfortunately, it’s one of those things that I frequently fail at making the right amount of time…

    4 条评论
  • Using Predictive Analytics to Improve Decision Making

    Using Predictive Analytics to Improve Decision Making

    If you are in the tech industry, there’s no doubt you've heard about machine learning and predictive analytics. You’ve…

    2 条评论
  • AgileThought's Top 2018 Blog Posts

    AgileThought's Top 2018 Blog Posts

    With 2018 now in the books, I wanted to take a look back at the most popular content published by our AgileThinkers…

  • Laws of Software Development

    Laws of Software Development

    In speaking with people about the complexity of software development, one comparison I’ve often used to describe it is…

    9 条评论
  • Agile Reading List – 2017 Q3 Update

    Agile Reading List – 2017 Q3 Update

    Since 2011, I've published a software development-focused reading list. These are books, that in my opinion, should be…

    4 条评论
  • Advice for early-career software development professionals

    Advice for early-career software development professionals

    A few times a year, I’m asked to talk to our incoming class of typically freshly-graduated computer science and…

    2 条评论
  • The future of context-adaptive devices?

    The future of context-adaptive devices?

    We are seeing growing trend in mobile platforms is to attempt to be relevant in the context in which you are using…

  • A Day in the Life of a Software Developer, 2031 Edition

    A Day in the Life of a Software Developer, 2031 Edition

    I thought I’d post something a little different, and take a fun look at what might the day in the life of a software…

    5 条评论
  • Where should Scrum Masters report?

    Where should Scrum Masters report?

    I have heard this question perhaps twenty times over the past several months. “What part of the organization should…

    5 条评论

社区洞察

其他会员也浏览了