Not only it is the duty of the purse string holders needing to know precisely, without being clouded by technical jargon, what a software solution can do for the enterprise, every users need to know. This ensure that the buyers and users know precisely what they are getting and what they are paying for.
It is refreshing to come across this article in Financial Times relaying the experience of a very wise and persistent director of an enterprise that "demanded the computing experts translate their plans into plain English."
Far too often, as I have observed, that the recipients of software products choose to keep quiet for fear of showing up their ignorance or failure to comprehend of the materials from the so-called "technical experts". They all should emulate this "Dennis".
In fact, it is the communication fault of the "technical experts" that fail to explain the materials, particularly the functional part, in the terms that the users can understand. I don't expect them to explain how data base schemas are designed, XML messages being passed around or how to pool connections but at least they should be able to answer user-centric questions like what is the response time of say 20,000 users accessing the system, the stability of the system in terms of how often one expects a failure.
In a theme similar to the "Why Software Sucks" but at a different level, the messages from the FT article are worth remembering. Admitting one does not understand the gobbledegook, often silently, and then not demanding answers to one's satisfaction is an abdication of one's duty.
A site devoted to discussing techniques that promote quality and ethical practices in software development.
- ▼ 2014 (10)
- ► 2013 (13)
- ► 2012 (23)
- ► 2011 (23)
- ► 2010 (60)
- ► 2009 (60)
- ► 2008 (25)
- ► 2007 (80)