Six people, C-level executives from different companies, all working in software development. Surely, we all have different experience, different clients, different fields of business and expertise.
However, the issues, painful moments and emotionally intense situations are incredibly similar. In an hour-long chat we covered lots of different aspects, but in the end it appeared that one of the most critical things in software development, for all of us, is expectation management.
Some of us have clients. Some have customers. Some have partners and investors. Anyhow, there is always someone with his or her own expectations of how things should work. How products have to be developed. How software development projects have to be managed.
And if something goes differently, doesn’t live up to these expectations or just seems not to live up to them — you have an issue. You have an angry customer, an unhappy client, a disillusioned investor, a grumbling partner. Your life suddenly becomes filled with negative emotions, heated arguments, misunderstandings — and risks. It starts to build up, and risks grow from small ones to huge ones. Relations suffer, projects burn, businesses crush.
All due to poor expectations management.
I guess it’s very much a universal rule that can be applied to any part of our lives, not only to business, and not only to software development business.
However, today I’m more interested in expectations management related to software development. More specifically — how different people, different companies approach it. How they manage the expectations, how they mitigate the risks associated with this issue.
Based on our discussion, it roughly sums up to two different approaches:
- You either involve a person into every process, provide as much clarity and as much information as needed, and groom the expectations on a daily basis
- Or you take a stance of a “know-it-all expert”. You make sure this person trusts you with all decision-making, only checking the end results. Specific agreements help a lot, metrics are a must.
First approach is more of a baby-sitting, deep involvement, and very personal approach. You build up trust gradually, at the same time grooming the relation.
Second is more about metrics, acceptance criteria, agreements set in stone. Or in writing, which is virtually the same in business, right? At least it should be like that.. I guess.. in some ideal world.. 🙂
Both approaches have their upsides and downsides, thus neither is better in principal. Instead, you have to understand the pros and cons, in order to make a conscious choice between them in your current situation.
Then again, maybe I’m missing something? Maybe there are some other viable options?