Long time no see, eh? I know I’ve promised to write about a lot of stuff here, and I see this queue of you hardly waiting to read my next topic on process manufacturing, but I am just far too lazy to think it out thoroughly. So, an easier one, but still about manufacturing.
I spent this week delivering two courses about manufacturing in Microsoft Dynamics NAV. Usually, these trainings are gatherings of partners who discuss geeky stuff over coffee breaks. This time, it was kind of different – there were two people from the customer front, and it was really amazing to listen to customer perspective when learning about standard NAV.
One of the points raised today, in the midst of closing of Manufacturing II course, was about parallel routings. Do we do them, or do we not. A tough one, indeed.
I never really expected that my post about my laptop outperforming an 8-headed dragon of a server would draw that much attention: record number of first-day reads of any blog post on my blog ever (134), and record number of comments (11 comments, by 5 people, me included). Not a big deal, but I believe you deserve a conclusion, to know how it all ended.
It’s a well known fact that IT projects fail every so often. Standish Group has been researching the success and failure factors of IT projects for a decade and a half, and they publish their results in their CHAOS report every two years or so. According to their 2006 report, only about 35% of projects can be categorized as successful, while 65% are declared unsuccessful. In this report, word unsuccessful can mean anything from exceeding time and/or budget (46% of projects) or failing altogether (19% of them). With such a huge proportion of projects going astray, maybe there was something wrong with these projects from the very beginning. Were the time and budget unrealistic? Were the project requirements, or even objectives, unrealistic? Maybe. Or maybe not. How can you tell?