Difference between revisions of "FAQ/Contract management/en"
(Created page with "==Can you please provide the details of how specific parts of the website will work?== ''As there is a lot of content work to do in this area. Particularly the related informatio...") |
|||
| (12 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | {{Languages|FAQ/Contract management}} | ||
| + | [[Category:FAQ]] | ||
==Can you please provide the details of how specific parts of the website will work?== | ==Can you please provide the details of how specific parts of the website will work?== | ||
| − | '' | + | ''Particularly the related information and featured slot on the category page despite repeated requests. (The first request was during your visit)'' |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | Just wanted to elaborate on this, because the neutral reader of your comment might conclude that 2Value is not responding well. Maybe I am not getting quite right what you wanted to express, sorry if that is the case. | + | In my perspective: How can 2Value provide the way specific parts of the website will work upfront, while the (content structure of the site that should the) basis for template-development is still changing. Just wanted to elaborate on this, because the neutral reader of your comment might conclude that 2Value is not responding well. Maybe I am not getting quite right what you wanted to express, sorry if that is the case. |
| − | |||
| − | |||
==It's a very small detail? Are you seriously suggesting this would hold up the project?== | ==It's a very small detail? Are you seriously suggesting this would hold up the project?== | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| + | I will asked the associate whether he agrees that this is a small issue. It is my role as a contract manager to make possible extra work issues explicit in cases, developers have to alert & assess the extra time needed / report time spend on unforeseen issues. Hope that clarifies. | ||
==Could you clarify - how is this more work for anyone other than us?== | ==Could you clarify - how is this more work for anyone other than us?== | ||
| − | I can just respond in general with a clarification: The whole issue was not in the RFP and therefore per definition extra work. If there is no or little work needed: great, it then will have no impact! But please note that every analysis, communication, alternatives, proposal for solution costs time and our time has to be paid like anyone | + | I can just respond in general with a clarification: The whole issue was not in the RFP and therefore per definition extra work. If there is no or little work needed: great, it then will have no impact! But please note that every analysis, communication, alternatives, proposal for solution costs time and our time has to be paid like anyone else's time? |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | == | + | ==Why all these "extra work" comments, we are not done yet!== |
| − | I just got a list of "peep's" from | + | I just got a list of "peep's" from the working associates. We will get back to you in detail about the reason for the peeps, the consequences in time & money and the links to the service cases that are involved. The main issues are: |
| − | + | <list of issue> | |
| − | - Work and advice out of scope. | + | Example |
| + | - Styling was held back by incomplete resources | ||
| + | - Work and advice out of scope. | ||
| + | - Several interations in improvement of the site's functionality and content structure (that is interlinked with the styling effect) | ||
| − | + | In some cases efforts have already been done. This has an impact on time spend and the deadline of RFP's wishlist. | |
| − | We suggest to rename SprintX as | + | We suggest to rename SprintX as a new Sprint and try to agree on another assignment for extra work done or work that still has to be done. |
| − | |||
| − | |||
==I don't see how getting it working is outside your scope?== | ==I don't see how getting it working is outside your scope?== | ||
| − | Getting it to work is not out of our scope. It is an interdependent effort. | + | Getting it to work is not out of our scope. It is an interdependent effort. Your tasks contain the functional aspects of website, 2Value does the template (we have to get it to work and "oh my": there is still work to be done which is in scope....). |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | + | As soon as we are advising you, getting the resources in place and getting your part of the job done or improved: it is out of scope. No big deal as far as I am concerned: we made our estimates based on that assumption. And we report it back. It is also a way to keep our experts focussed on the deadlines and the job we promised to do first, and then afterwards help out with the other things if time & budget allows us to. | |
| − | @ | + | ==How can extra work be initiated?== |
| + | @Associate: please ask permission to actually spend the time to improve the code before we do it and deliver it. This is done by assigning the customer, ask the permission, and do not continue before the customer confirms. Please be very consistent in our way of working, otherwise we eat our budget on out of scope issues and end up delivering the in scope functionality too late. | ||
| − | == | + | ==What sequence of tasks do we perform towards the end of a sprint?== |
| + | Somebody else than the developer does the internal 2Value testing. With a resource form the customers a reference: e.g. their user testing scheme. | ||
| + | Result: a list of MoSCoW findings based on our proposal. This is the internal test method (dutch): http://wiki.2value.nl/index.php?title=Testing/Bevindingen_evalueren | ||
| + | ===Important=== | ||
| + | @Associate: could you fix the current Sprint at XX.XXu on the test server (that means: stop working) and send the URL to the tester. | ||
Latest revision as of 16:15, 4 January 2012
| Language: | Nederlands • English |
|---|
Contents
- 1 Can you please provide the details of how specific parts of the website will work?
- 2 It's a very small detail? Are you seriously suggesting this would hold up the project?
- 3 Could you clarify - how is this more work for anyone other than us?
- 4 Why all these "extra work" comments, we are not done yet!
- 5 I don't see how getting it working is outside your scope?
- 6 How can extra work be initiated?
- 7 What sequence of tasks do we perform towards the end of a sprint?
Can you please provide the details of how specific parts of the website will work?
Particularly the related information and featured slot on the category page despite repeated requests. (The first request was during your visit)
In my perspective: How can 2Value provide the way specific parts of the website will work upfront, while the (content structure of the site that should the) basis for template-development is still changing. Just wanted to elaborate on this, because the neutral reader of your comment might conclude that 2Value is not responding well. Maybe I am not getting quite right what you wanted to express, sorry if that is the case.
It's a very small detail? Are you seriously suggesting this would hold up the project?
I will asked the associate whether he agrees that this is a small issue. It is my role as a contract manager to make possible extra work issues explicit in cases, developers have to alert & assess the extra time needed / report time spend on unforeseen issues. Hope that clarifies.
Could you clarify - how is this more work for anyone other than us?
I can just respond in general with a clarification: The whole issue was not in the RFP and therefore per definition extra work. If there is no or little work needed: great, it then will have no impact! But please note that every analysis, communication, alternatives, proposal for solution costs time and our time has to be paid like anyone else's time?
Why all these "extra work" comments, we are not done yet!
I just got a list of "peep's" from the working associates. We will get back to you in detail about the reason for the peeps, the consequences in time & money and the links to the service cases that are involved. The main issues are:
<list of issue>
Example - Styling was held back by incomplete resources - Work and advice out of scope. - Several interations in improvement of the site's functionality and content structure (that is interlinked with the styling effect)
In some cases efforts have already been done. This has an impact on time spend and the deadline of RFP's wishlist.
We suggest to rename SprintX as a new Sprint and try to agree on another assignment for extra work done or work that still has to be done.
I don't see how getting it working is outside your scope?
Getting it to work is not out of our scope. It is an interdependent effort. Your tasks contain the functional aspects of website, 2Value does the template (we have to get it to work and "oh my": there is still work to be done which is in scope....).
As soon as we are advising you, getting the resources in place and getting your part of the job done or improved: it is out of scope. No big deal as far as I am concerned: we made our estimates based on that assumption. And we report it back. It is also a way to keep our experts focussed on the deadlines and the job we promised to do first, and then afterwards help out with the other things if time & budget allows us to.
How can extra work be initiated?
@Associate: please ask permission to actually spend the time to improve the code before we do it and deliver it. This is done by assigning the customer, ask the permission, and do not continue before the customer confirms. Please be very consistent in our way of working, otherwise we eat our budget on out of scope issues and end up delivering the in scope functionality too late.
What sequence of tasks do we perform towards the end of a sprint?
Somebody else than the developer does the internal 2Value testing. With a resource form the customers a reference: e.g. their user testing scheme. Result: a list of MoSCoW findings based on our proposal. This is the internal test method (dutch): http://wiki.2value.nl/index.php?title=Testing/Bevindingen_evalueren
Important
@Associate: could you fix the current Sprint at XX.XXu on the test server (that means: stop working) and send the URL to the tester.
