8 ಮೇಲೆ "ಆಲೋಚನೆಗಳು"ಮಾಡಬಹುದು” ವರ್ಸಸ್ "ಮಾಡಬೇಕು” ಶೇರ್ಪಾಯಿಂಟ್ ಯೋಜನೆಗಳು ರಲ್ಲಿ”

1. Ruven Gotz ಜೂನ್ 18, 2010 ನಲ್ಲಿ 12:31 PM

   My past experience tells me that you are correct: The desperately needed requirement is often quickly discarded, usually because it is not well thought through. I agree that it is our job as consultants to help steer the client towards a successful solution, not just fulfilling a requirement.

   ಹೇಗಾದರೂ: We don’t understand our clients’ business as well as they do. It’s important that, as consultants, we don’t become arrogant, telling the client that their requirement is unneccessary. ಆದ್ದರಿಂದ, we have a bit of a tightrope to walk: Help the client think through the resons for a requirement; explain why you would like to suggest another course and offer alternatives. ಉದಾಹರಣೆಗೆ, offer to start with a simple solution which can be enhanced later if it turns out not to meet the need.

   As with most things in life, finding the right balance can be tricky, but is worth the investment.

   -Ruven

   ಉತ್ತರಿಸಿ ↓
   1. ಪಾಲ್ ಗಾಲ್ವಿನ್ ಲೇಖಕ ನೀಡಿಜೂನ್ 18, 2010 ನಲ್ಲಿ 1:02 PM

      Great point, Ruven. There is a fine line. I personally tend to “give in” rather than take a hard line. It always makes me uncomfortable when someone pushes back against client requirements twice and three or more times.

      I almost always follow the “simple solution” approach you describe. I can’t actually think of one instance where it didn’t work out best in the end.

      ಉತ್ತರಿಸಿ ↓
2. ಪಾಲ್ Liebrand ಜೂನ್ 18, 2010 ನಲ್ಲಿ 12:57 PM

   I generally agree with this post Paul. ವಾಸ್ತವವಾಗಿ, I catch myself often saying to people “SharePoint can do anything you want it to do except what YOU want it to do.” I often try to find simple out of the box methods to solve an end users business need. As much as I love and enjoying developing solutions in SharePoint I’d rather try something simple and out of the box first.

   Most times this lands up being enough and other times it generates a new idea for them that will make building a custom solution better for them.

   Great post.

   ಪಾಲ್ Liebrand
   ಟ್ವಿಟರ್: @PaulLiebrand

   ಉತ್ತರಿಸಿ ↓
3. tony rockwell ಜೂನ್ 21, 2010 ನಲ್ಲಿ 3:51 PM

   I have to deal with these requests very frequently. Luckily, often the business will acknowledge the request is a ‘nice-to-have’ rather than a ‘need’.
   When it isn’t clear I start with asking what they are trying to solve with the request. That typically catches items that they simply didn’t recognize as a nice-to-have initially. Then I move on to evaluate what they are asking to determine if it is actually something simple or not; and what the impact scope is like (such as is this a change to a single sub-site or to the whole farm).
   The greater the impact scope, the greater number of questions I raise. If the answers do not sound like a true need, but are still focused on acting like it is a need, then I present the time/cost and whatever impact that may be associated with the request.
   If the business still wants me to go forward, I do, but we all have a much more clear picture of what is changing.

   ಉತ್ತರಿಸಿ ↓
4. Frank ಜೂನ್ 21, 2010 ನಲ್ಲಿ 4:31 PM

   I’m new to your site but follow you on EndUserSharePoint. I work for a military hospital and know what everyone is talking about when it comes to “Can Do” and “Should Do”. I get this almost every day and the “Can SharePoint make documents not printable? Can we take away the ‘send to’ option?” The department would like to have some documents view only (no problem, done) because of the numbering and tracking system for the documents. I’ve been searching different blogs and sites and can’t find the answer. Hope someone can help.

   ಉತ್ತರಿಸಿ ↓
5. ಮಾರ್ಕ್ ಆಂಡರ್ಸನ್ ಜೂನ್ 22, 2010 ನಲ್ಲಿ 2:01 PM

   ಪಾಲ್:

   I think that the push back, or at least the discussion about the real utility of things, is what separates real SharePoint Professionals from plain developers. We can all make SharePoint do this stuff, like hiding the “View All site Content” link even though most people don’t see it anyway. It’s our job to help the client (internal or external, it doesn’t make a difference) understand which bits in SharePoint really are useful and why, why some UI things may actually be detrimental, ಇತ್ಯಾದಿ. We ought to know better than they do and that is what we are paid for. If we simply acquiesce to every demand, then we’re only giving 50% at most.

   ಪೋಸ್ಟ್ ಧನ್ಯವಾದಗಳು!

   ಎಂ.

   ಉತ್ತರಿಸಿ ↓

6. Pingback: Steve Ballmer is a God; Why Google Won't Beat Microsoft in Cloud Collaboration; Adobe Brings Flash to Mobiles - SharePoint Daily - Bamboo Nation

7. Mostafa Elzoghbi ಜೂನ್ 28, 2010 ನಲ್ಲಿ 4:11 ಮೇಲೆ

   ಹೈ,
   Thanks for the post and asking everyone to leave a comment for his experience, In these situations i used to give both option to the client, There is an easy to build/fast solution which gives you almost what you need but not 100% ( from performance, look and feel, maintainability..etc) and there is another custom solution that gives you what you want, present an estimate for both solutions and Cost associated to it, and then usually if the custom solution cost is higher they used to say let’s go with almost what we need :). Unless what they want is really affects the process and a highly demanded feature. I usually expect on those meetings someone will jump in and start discussing why ? and for your experience with the product you can convince him Why and How long will it take?

   ಈ ಸಹಾಯ ಭಾವಿಸುತ್ತೇವೆ.

   ಉತ್ತರಿಸಿ ↓