• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Test report sent; now the fighting starts

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Test report sent; now the fighting starts

    Have sent test report to project manager and acceptant. Basically, the system does pretty much what the design says it should (which itself is a historic moment in the annals of systems development), but the acceptant won’t accept the system as he’s saying the design doesn’t address his business needs, despite having signed off on it. Project Manager rightly says he's delivered what was asked for and should now recieve praise from all around and sign-off.

    I have suggested a compromise which should keep them occupied long enough for me and Project Manager and Program Manager to send some more invoices while they thank me for rescuing them all from a Catch-22 situation; Project Manager should cost and estimate all changes demanded by acceptant while acceptant writes business cases for each change required, assisted in doing so by me. F**king obvious really, but try explaining that to permies.

    This could blow up in my face, or it could give me 2 more months invoicing.
    And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

    #2
    Originally posted by Mich the Tester View Post
    Have sent test report to project manager and acceptant. Basically, the system does pretty much what the design says it should (which itself is a historic moment in the annals of systems development), but the acceptant won’t accept the system as he’s saying the design doesn’t address his business needs, despite having signed off on it. Project Manager rightly says he's delivered what was asked for and should now recieve praise from all around and sign-off.

    I have suggested a compromise which should keep them occupied long enough for me and Project Manager and Program Manager to send some more invoices while they thank me for rescuing them all from a Catch-22 situation; Project Manager should cost and estimate all changes demanded by acceptant while acceptant writes business cases for each change required, assisted in doing so by me. F**king obvious really, but try explaining that to permies.

    This could blow up in my face, or it could give me 2 more months invoicing.
    Sounds like a win/win to me.
    or even a win/win/win




    (\__/)
    (>'.'<)
    ("")("") Born to Drink. Forced to Work

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by Mich the Tester View Post
      Have sent test report to project manager and acceptant. Basically, the system does pretty much what the design says it should (which itself is a historic moment in the annals of systems development), but the acceptant won’t accept the system as he’s saying the design doesn’t address his business needs, despite having signed off on it. Project Manager rightly says he's delivered what was asked for and should now recieve praise from all around and sign-off.

      I have suggested a compromise which should keep them occupied long enough for me and Project Manager and Program Manager to send some more invoices while they thank me for rescuing them all from a Catch-22 situation; Project Manager should cost and estimate all changes demanded by acceptant while acceptant writes business cases for each change required, assisted in doing so by me. F**king obvious really, but try explaining that to permies.

      This could blow up in my face, or it could give me 2 more months invoicing.
      Was it just gaps in the requirements or were the requirements misinterpreted?
      Was this a waterfall SDLC?
      Who gathered the requirements?
      Knock first as I might be balancing my chakras.

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by suityou01 View Post
        Was it just gaps in the requirements or were the requirements misinterpreted?
        Was this a waterfall SDLC?
        Who gathered the requirements?
        Package implementation. Board chose the package according to GCTPM*, department didn't agree in the first place, wanted something else; design covered differences to standard functionality. Acceptant agreed to designs without understanding the standard functionality. Development team have covered all the designs, but acceptant is still upset about the package. And rightly so; there should now be lots of RFCs to test.


        *Golf Course Technology Purchasing Methodology
        And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by Mich the Tester View Post
          Package implementation. Board chose the package according to GCTPM*, department didn't agree in the first place, wanted something else; design covered differences to standard functionality. Acceptant agreed to designs without understanding the standard functionality. Development team have covered all the designs, but acceptant is still upset about the package. And rightly so; there should now be lots of RFCs to test.


          *Golf Course Technology Purchasing Methodology
          What a shower.
          Keeeeeeeeeeeep invoicing.
          Knock first as I might be balancing my chakras.

          Comment

          Working...
          X