Hi Felix, thanks for your reply. I appreciate your advice and think your comments are accurate. I'm still now sure how this can be resolved without making some big changes in the team though! Thanks, John.
Hi mbrault, thanks for your reply - it's much apprecated. I think part of the problem is there is nobody in the business who will take on the role of specifying and prioritising requirements - it's always been left up to IT. Thanks, John
Hi John,
A disconnected sponsor is not uncommon; is there someone in the business below hi/her that are the real driver for the project? Or is this a project that people feel 'needs to get done' but no one has real ownership over it?
I've had success working with the people who are impacted by the project and care about its outcome to get them to discuss with executives the reasons why the business needs to have more control over a project. If the sponsor's direct reports raise the issue it is much more likely to be considered as something that needs to be addressed.
Hi Jarett, no there is not really one person who is ther driver i.e. can stand up and say this is how it should work. It's an enterprise-wide project so there are several stakeholder groups. It is definitely a project that everyone feels 'needs to get done' as you say but there is no real business ownership. Hence, I guess the drive coming from IT.
Hi:
Be aware, especially for enterprise wide efforts, the problem is not so much about determining requirements as it is about determining the interrelationship between the requirements. In this area especially, the user community is not going to be able to help much, as typically each group has a very "silo" understanding of what happens.
Success will depend on a very strong focus on essential interrelationships between processes/functions.
Tony
brought to you by enabling practitioners & organizations to achieve their goals using: