RE: Re: Responsibility

Andrey,

>  DE> Though BCWP doesn't measure value in the usual sense of the word, 
> 
> So why they call it a Value?  As far as I can get it, it's an Expense.

Good point. I'm reminded of the child saying "but he has no clothes!"

I spent many years working under such systems of measurement - although
not using these particular terms. I think the fundamental reason for
doing this is that value is often much harder to objectify than expense.

In the early days of data processing, we replaced manual systems with
automated ones, and it was possible to compare the expense of running
one system with that of the other. The difference was the savings - 
or value.

But as we started to do things that had been previously impossible,
measurement was harder - but still required. So something else got
measured simply because it was possible. In this model, the value
of work equates to the original estimate - possibly adjusted - of
what it will take to do it. If you thought something would take
40 hours, and you only took twenty, you "saved" 20 hours. You can
imagine what effect that has on the estimates.

What people like Glen are trying to do is to move away from input
measures to output measures but without losing the objective 
nature of the measurement. Having tried this in a past career, I
know it's possible but devilishly hard.

Btw, I expect most top executives would understand and smile at
your characterization of the measure as Expense rather than
Value... even those who are doing it.

Charlie Poole
[email protected]
www.pooleconsulting.com
www.charliepoole.org





------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get 128 Bit SSL Encryption!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/CBxunD/vN2EAA/xGHJAA/NhFolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
extremecustomering-unsubscribe-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw@public.gmane.org

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/