Toluu

The Old New Thing

not actually to establish a blogging point where individuals can enrich their learns on facilitating and leveraging .NET-related activities most effectively

Rachmaninov had big hands: An illustrationYesterday

Rachmaninov's Prelude in C# minor, Op. 3, No. 2, performed as it is written, by classical music comedy duo Igudesman & Joo.

I tried to learn that piece once. I didn't last long.

The great thing about priorities is that you can always go one higherYesterday

The phenomenon I call priority inflation has spread to product planning documents as well. Back in the old days, there were three priority levels:

• Priority 1: must have. If you don't accomplish a priority 1 item, you may as well just cancel the project because it ain't shipping.
• Priority 2: should have. If you don't accomplish a priority 2 item, the product is significantly weaker, but you can still ship it.
• Priority 3: nice to have. If you don't accomplish a priority 3 item, it's not quite as awesome as it could have been, but it's still a good product.

Over the past few years, I've seen a shift in the labelling of priorities in planning documents. A new priority has been introduced: Priority Zero. Nobody has explained to me what Priority 0 means, but I assume somebody invented it to emphasize that the feature is even more critical than priority 1. Mind you, I'm not sure what could be more important to a project than "If we don't do this, we're all fired." Maybe "If we don't do this, the earth will explode."

As you might expect, priority inflation has a trickle-down effect. People whose features had been assigned priority 1 said, "Hey, how come my feature isn't priority 0? It's just as critical as that other guy's feature." Soon, everything that was priority 1 got reclassified as priority 0. Na

If everything is top priority, then nothing is top priorityNovember 20

Last time, I mentioned that eventually everything is top priority. A similar topic is what I'm calling priority inflation, which takes more than one form.

Today's priority inflation is the introduction of new "top priority" items. (Chris Becker has some thoughts on this topic as well.)

"XYZ is very important to our project. Please make it your top priority." A few weeks later, "ABC is very important to our project. It should take priority over all other issues." When this happens, I like to ask, "Is this even more important than XYZ?" I've done it so much that my management has changed the way it introduces new top priorities: Instead of just saying "Please make ABC your top priority," they list out all the existing top priorities... in priority order.

ABC is very important to our project. There are just a handful of ABC issues remaining, and we would like to close them out by the end of the month. If you have an ABC issue, please make it your top priority. To summarize:

1. ABC issues.
2. XYZ issues.
3. DEF issues.

I like this approach because it forces management to understand and acknowledge where their priorities are. If you're going to ship a product, you have to make hard choices, and one of them is deciding where your priorities are.

If everything is t

Adventures in product testing: This phone's so hot, it'll set your head on fireNovember 19

Actually, this is pretty cool. A phone that sets your head on fire. Most people charge extra for that.

These lithium-ion polymer batteries can overheat due to an internal short circuit in the batteries, which can pose a fire hazard.

The battery has only been used in the GN9120 wireless headset.

Go ahead, make up your own joke.

If you wait long enough, everything is our top priorityNovember 19

I always crack a smile whenever I hear or read someone say that "XYZ is our top priority." The person may believe it at the moment they say it, but just wait a little while, and soon there will be a new top priority.

If you call the person out on their shifting priorities, they usually come up with some hand-waving explanation that the two "top" priorities are actually the same thing.

Last week, you said that customer satisfaction was our top priority, but just now you said that our employees' well-being is our top priority. Which one is the real top priority? In other words, which is more important, customer satisfaction or employee well-being?

"Well, you see, if our employees are happy and healthy, that shows itself in the quality of service we provide our customers, so the two are really facets of the same underlying issue. Which is our top priority."

But there can be a conflict between the two. For example, longer hours of operation improve customer service, but it also takes a toll on the workforce. Which goal is more important?

"That's an interesting question. Obviously we would work very hard to try to avoid such a conflict. I'm confident that my leadership team will be able to address both issues without having to sacrifice on either one."

Wait, now they are separate issues again? You said earlier that they were the same issue.

"I think I've answered your question. Anybody else hav