Mark Riggle in his article Breaking the cycle of failure, published on 10, August 2001 on Internet has described in brief about the reasons of the failures of the soft ware business in Asia. Mark Riggle is of the view that most of the Software projects do not succeed and fail at an shocking rate, and the figures for facts of the data warehouse development organizational behaviors projects are also not encouraging. The eighth data warehouse was established because of the seven failures and the failure was the result of lack of analysis. If the system is built wrong from the very beginning the time is lost and expensive corrections are made which some time are also not successful.
Highlighting the widespread and expensive failures in software projects Mark Riggle attributes insufficient, conflicting and transformation of requirements all the way through the venture life cycle as the most vital reasons for these disappointments. The wide-ranging description of failure according to Mark Riggle is because of extensive schedules, expending more than the allocated and approved budget, and collapse to come up to the stockholder’s expectations. The extended schedules and higher budgets generally reflect the adaptation of huge fraction of the project to meet varying requirements. Failures in data warehousing tasks also fall into the same intricacy where false necessities generate additional unnecessary work and, as a result it costs tremendously high. [Mark Riggle, Breaking the Cycle of Failure]
From the study of the article it is learnt that many software and data warehouse projects, fail because the people associated with such projects make the errors attributable towards communication .The data warehouse development staff hold the share holders accountable, and the stakeholders hold the developers responsible for the debacles. The Software Company, view its misunderstanding and failure about the business often attributed to the users varying their psyche, or the user oriented failure mode. The lesson learnt here is that it is essential to always improve the communication problem in an organization. User centered failure means; some requirements from the users are innately variable and incomprehensible. The users don't know what they actually wish for and can only identify it by considering what the data store can create and then reacting to that they desire for rather something else.
Another lesson, which is learnt from the article is that, another form of the trouble is the company oriented and this failure form, relates to the misapprehension between the business stakeholders and developers, which is the root of the trouble. Such state of affairs by and large take place for the reason that the developers are not well stuck in the business, and the stakeholders do not comprehend the expansion procedures.
The significant issue related to this aspect is that the developers are not well known with the stakeholders' fundamental trade assumption and configuration, which direct to extremely diverse interpretations of the business user's needs. Therefore, the developers require quite a few ways to discover the problem itself and certainly without a perception of the exact problem, the correct way out is unattainable. Therefore the developer-centered failures can be resolved basically by overcoming the communication problem.
Need example of research paper? we can write a custom paper for you!
It is significant to modify the character of the communication between the parties. Though a lot of other methods are also available which move around the concept of combined function of improving communication. The ongoing high failure toll surely indicates that these methods are not enough. The data models are used to smooth the progress of communication, but they are repeatedly hard for the businesspeople to appreciate. The article also highlights another important aspect about the requirements to over come the problem, which is deep-rooted, and have to be looked at in depth to find out what precisely defines a business.
Some time the business is known as a set of processes that should add value to the customer and make a profit for the business. A business process has to be well understood that is primarily a timed list of actions executed by a driving force that consume resources and produces output. In addition, a hierarchical association of procedures exists, which can create a process from many sub processes and this abstraction of subprocess hierarchies is crucial to the requirements' understanding. [Mark Riggle, Breaking the Cycle of Failure]
From the study of different organizations and their failures it is established that there are many factors for unsuccessfulness for the companies; the companies, which fail, tend to lack the ability to stop wrong things from occurrence. They companies fail to generate a culture that bears a dispute in which planning processes are encouraged to take no financial risks sincerely. These companies concentrate entirely on financial actions of presentation. Such failed companies also dishearten employees from thinking about their work as whole people, from using their moral and social intelligence as well as their business intelligence. The companies, which fail, tend to communicate to the same circle of people and information sources continually and avoid people or organizations that differ with or criticize them.
Another factor, which should be taken care of, is that once a commitment to a particular project or product is made than it should overpower all other considerations may that be financial, ethical, or social. And similarly the senior leadership including senior managers must consider and act on the ethical or social values .in brief, when companies do not examine their operations from a long-term perspective in a social context, they are much more vulnerable to the type of bad things in the buisiness.therefore a company must bring this point of view to its approach development and operational planning. [Business and Human Rights in a Time of Change]
Generally most companies begin to deny the accusations and attacking the critics. For the acquisitions these companies are more commonly out of touch with communal attitudes towards human behaviors .It is tends to have the opposite effect. The companies generally have the reluctance in the recognition of that something, which is needed to be done on priority. Those companies who abide the correct path remain on the way of development.
It also happens that with some modest steps such as a unenthusiastic internal analysis and review just prolongs the debate and further damages are made to the company's business and standing. When the company finally declare that specific error which has been made, also agrees to take corrective actions, and adopts such policies, which the shareholders later question about the delay in taking the corrective action. It is well under stood that the damaged reputation of the company takes long years of effort to rebuilt.