IT folks, how would you handle this scenerio?


#1

Sorry, I’m about as sharp as a circle…Not enough Soylent…Not the best example sorry

Big budget large scope multi discipline project affecting all lines of business in one way or the other.

Project is scoped, planned and implemented by people that aren’t aware of a lot of the real world issues that will ultimately cripple the project and upset a very large user base.

What’s done is done. How would you fix it?


#2

I’d handle it outside the Soylent forums, for starters.


#3

Lol, I’m referring to Soylent.


#4

I’d need more specifics to craft an action plan. This sounds like what happens here at my job on a weekly basis.

Some exec signs a contract with a client not understanding the ramifications, all of us have to perform an impossible implementation.


#5

Sounds like a…CHANGE REQUEST! Sorry, its a joke we have here at my work. We have pretty strict project descriptions and if the customer wants something different, they gotta submit a change request. However if we agree to something that isn’t doable then we usually have to agree to extend the schedule and eat the cost.


#6

I’m not sure this example applies terribly well to Soylent. They weren’t expecting this to be a “large scope multi discipline project” with a “very large user base”. Weren’t they originally after just $100k? The “problem” if anything was that they had no idea the amount of interest it was going to generate. If they’d only had to deliver $100k worth of orders, they might be in an entirely different position at the moment as far as customer satisfaction goes. But they got blindsided by “too much of a good thing” and are having to juggle like maniacs to try and stay ahead of the tsunami (how’s that for mixing my similes & metaphors?? LOL)

And I’m not sure that speculating about this sort of thing in the forum accomplishes much either. Well I suppose it may be entertaining for some… but I’m pretty sure they’ve got no shortage of “high end” business advisors at this point from their VC backers. I doubt they will benefit a whole lot from anything any of us would have to say in the forum. But hey I’ve been wrong before.


#7

Except they did want a very large user base, and they did want more than $100k. They wanted AT LEAST 100k just to get the ball rolling, that wasn’t their yearly goal or anything.

They made so many claims about piping soylent into your house and changing lifestyles, and every decision they have made was based on their expectation that most people will be purchasing as a lifestyle change and not just something to drink now and then.

It also was not a good idea, as people pointed out from the start, to continue taking orders and making promises, if what you say is correct and they were not prepared or expecting the “tsunami” as you put it.

This would be a great point had they not openly invited the tsunami onto their already flooded town of drowning backers.

They were on the Colbert Report, how do they not want a very large user base?


#8

Yeah I’m not saying they didn’t want a very large user base, just that they didn’t expect one quite this large, this fast. But as I said I could be wrong. It’s happened before… once. :wink:


#9

And for any other company I would agree with you and just say it was an oversight, you’re right it happens.

But Soylent opened the gates, blew the trumpets, sounded all the alarms while doing a rain dance. If they have too many pending orders, this time imo they only have themselves to blame.

We tried to tell them before, and we tried to tell them after.


#10

You know, you make a good point here. How much of what they’re doing (communications blackout, etc) might be driven by their VC backers as opposed to what the Soylent team wants to do? I don’t think I’ve heard that angle considered around here yet, but it could shed some light on the subject…it makes some sense that the business-oriented people would rather pull the communications plug rather than risk missed deadlines, transparency be damned. Remember, Rob was all about transparency.


#11

Agreed first new specualation I have to admit has merit. Doesn’t mean it bodes well, if anything that makes me more worried.

I have a feeling Muscle Milk Man doesn’t like how things are going at this moment.


#12

That’s pretty much what I’ve been assuming all along, have to say.


#13

For whatever reason, it hadn’t occurred to me.


#14

Yeah the VC angle was brought up at least once in another thread a while back. Given his original blog post and open-sourcing of the entire idea and formula, I’d be inclined to say that Rob’s natural inclination would be to just be open about everything. But for sure, monetary investors are going to feel differently and I’m sure what they say, goes. I fully expect that a large degree of the changes in their communication style has come from the mouths of the investors. And not surprisingly.


#15

Two things can change everything - Scale and Money. I suspect both are largely at play for this situation. Too much money is involved to simply wing it or go off the cuff anymore and the scale of the operation has created roadblocks they did not foresee. We need a discourse script that scans your post for dissent and if it does offers you a refund to just go away :smile:


#16

My boss and I have agreed that if we ever leave the company we will submit Service Catalog and Change Requests to go to the bathroom to piss.