The topic of how to do technical development has been relevant for 70 years, a lot of books have been written and the title of this article is clickbait, but this is a necessary measure, because I continue to encounter the same primitive errors from time to time. To a greater extent, this is relevant for techies and to a lesser extent for IT specialists:
- Financial waste
- Unreal product
- Wishful thinking in product validation and verification
- Failure to meet deadlines in the schedule
- Changing priorities in the course of the plan
- Suboptimal meetings
- Working with unverified subcontractors and suppliers
- Lack of unambiguous and invariable numbering of documentation. Changing the number of documentation in the process of working on a project
- Voluntary and forced change of duties for employees in the process
- Non-disclosure agreement is concluded after dismissal of employees
1. Financial waste
There are only a few companies in the world that are able to carry out RnD projects with their own funds, in Russia such companies are unknown to me - our projects are mainly financed by the state and external investors. And if the money is not theirs, then people who do not understand anything in RnD spend it at random. Example: buying special equipment to order from a foreign manufacturer without its branded special equipment. Special equipment for unique equipment costs, at first glance, unreasonably large sums of money, for reporting on government subsidies and grants, all these pipes and abstract nozzles for tens of thousands of dollars raise questions. And in the RnD companies themselves, as a rule, they want to quickly buy another imported toy instead of calmly and thoughtfully choosing and conducting comprehensive tests with the personal presence of the manufacturer.As a result, haste and savings lead to the same thing: oh, but we need this equipment so much, but in Russia no one can make it, or they can ... try to do it, but without guarantees it is not clear for how long. As a result, these "saved" tens of thousands are spent, and from above, delivery, design and plus 3-6 months of waiting for non-guaranteed manufacturing are paid separately.
2. Unreal product
Even competent leaders pronounce this phrase.
And there is nothing to invest in an initially unpromising product. Yes, it's not always possible to see this behind beautiful presentations and convincing business plans, but let's be honest with ourselves: it's great that these 90% of startups have failed, because we already have too many nonsense trying to forcibly release for the market.
90% of startups fail
3. Wishful thinking in product validation and verification
We like to justify the vileness in the conclusion of tests by the fact that we now have "capitalism", and in general "everything is possible." No, friends, emergency happens thanks to something like this. If everything is done in accordance with the standards voluntarily chosen by the checkpoints, then everything will work out (almost every standard and GOST allows you to cancel individual items if there are convincing arguments for this, so it is not necessary to "stall and go bankrupt" checking and testing everything in the world). And in falsification there is no saving, I assure you. All these exculpatory shouts from the dock "Yes, you cannot fulfill all the requirements and laws in our country!", Are only confirmation of their own thief and narrow-mindedness. You can, everything is possible. Compliance with laws and standards is the simplest thing about RnD. It's even nice if you relax.
4. Failure to meet deadlines in the schedule
Now the trend is to call the work schedule a roadmap - but whatever you like, the meaning does not change from the rearrangement of words. And the point is that the terms of work are systematically indicated without taking into account the occurrence of force majeure, in general. Everything is written with maximum optimism and the smile of a school student on his face. Especially smart people say that this is our mentality - to do everything on the last day, so why bother with competent timing. Yes, this is not a mentality, but an inability to organize and control the performance of work!
+ 30% of the time should be spent on the most incomprehensible tasks for the team.
+ 20% of the time is for tasks that depend on others: suppliers of non-standard equipment and work of subcontractors. But there is no need to lay in additional time for conducting a patent search. I hope the principle is clear. Drawing up a normal plan for the next 2-3 years takes about a month. The cherry on top of the curves of deadlines and their fulfillment is the absence of intelligible anti-crisis adjustments as a result of deviations from the deadlines.
5. Changing priorities in the process of implementing the plan
Well, we did one thing, it seems like it’s like everything will come to an end “by itself” and therefore we will take on another project, which is also relevant and money for it is given even more than for the first one. This happens every day and you know, in this case you can safely close the first project, and return all the money from public investments together with a fine and loss of reputation. It does not work like this: when the same team members are loaded with new tasks, they start running back and forth like multi-tool workers, when we have an engineer and a Swiss, and a reaper, and a gamer. All this only leads to major, irreparable failures. Do not mix and do not start replaying the project in the midst of giving in to emotions and lust for money.
6. Suboptimal meetings (control points)
I know that meetings annoy young specialists - to sit and talk when it is possible to do business. But believe me, bad meetings are better than no meetings. Treat meetings as points of control in the production map of the product being developed. Because the quality and price of your product will depend on only two things, one of which is a competent intermediate control. You will not be able to write it correctly without constant monitoring of your work. You need to learn to be objective and unbiased about your work if you want to complete a project. The optimal time for meetings is at 10:00 after tea, on Friday, once a week, the team simply reports on everything, ideally 15 minutes, and everyone is happy to think about the upcoming weekend until the end of the day.
7. Working with unverified subcontractors and suppliers
Everything is simple here, we work with those we know. We know their terms, quality, the likelihood of making a marriage. If a new supplier is needed, then we try to take this into account when drawing up a plan, for +100 letters of correspondence, approval of all requirements, signing an NDA, etc. will take a lot of time and effort. Looking for a more budgetary supplier in RnD is a wrecking task, because this is an optimization task, and it is performed by process engineers after being transferred to production. Good developers don't do optimization. If someone new is eager to work with you, then let them send free samples, demonstrate the timing and quality of their work, do not hesitate to demand it.
8. Lack of unambiguous and constant numbering of documentation. Changing the number of documentation in the process of working on a project
No kidding, I equate such actions with sabotaging a project, and the person initiating this process is a pest from competitors. Think for yourself, do you want the entire encoding to be rewritten on hundreds of reports, drawings and 3D models? How will you change your entire chat history in your Wrike or Trello? Forget it, don't even think.
9. Voluntary-compulsory change of duties of employees in the process
Here, without comment, by your actions you will simply lose a specialist and will look for a new one and teach him. Why do you need this to show once again who is the boss?
10. A non-disclosure agreement is concluded after the dismissal of employees
Actually, the NDA is a simple, not a very scary document , but in domestic companies some wild, sometimes slavish points are included in it. Take imported NDAs as an example, correct and do not scare people after being fired with horrors written by unqualified lawyers.