Am 05.02.2014 09:39, schrieb scott:
>> Hypothetically we *are* a "software company". Oh and hey, we do have
>> planning meetings. Trouble is, the estimation process is roughly
>> "everybody picks a number, and we see if the numbers look similar". That
>> still doesn't seem very scientific. Then again, when you're asked to
>> produce a new feature and you have no idea what libraries might be
>> available to help you or what OS-specific hiccups will trip you up, what
>> more can you do?
>
> You iron out those issues in the "investigation" phase of the project,
> or whatever you want to call it. Here we call it Phase 3, which is the
> engineers scratching the surface, doing some rudimentary testing etc,
> and providing very specific deliverables at the end, which includes a
> detailed time schedule. Phase 4 is then where all the detail work gets
> done, of course you'll hit hiccups, but hopefully during phase 3 you
> minimised the risk of any big ones and identified the things most likely
> to trip you up.
>
> Although we do products that consist of mechanical, electrical and
> software elements, I assume a similar development process is in use for
> software-only products. I can imagine phase 3 being selecting which
> libraries to use and doing some basic testing on them, identifying any
> high-risk areas and doing some testing on those, planning a framework
> for the product etc.

Sounds like feasibility study to me.

Post a reply to this message