Specific individuals were a driving force behind the computerisation (C.1.1b) and had a vision for the scope and shape of the system (C.1.3b). The conception of the system was particularly affected by who was currently providing the vision for the system (C.1.2d).
The technical ability of developers was highly regarded in X and was critically important in the construction of Multinational (C.2.5a). The importance of appropriate experience was less widely acknowledged although experience (or the lack of it) had a critical influence in all aspects of development (C.1.4e, C.2.3i, C.3.1i). However, there were some occasions where an individual's lack of technical experience was unimportant (C.2.2d).
The personal qualities of an individual were critical in the construction of the system even though they were less often mentioned than ability. The personal quality most often mentioned was the ability to be tough or strong-willed (C.2.5b). Seniority of an individual sometimes had an important effect on the X development (C.2.3i) but was frequently not as important as an individual's commitment (C.3.1b).
It was recognised that the good personal relationship between Gordan and David was critical to the success (C.1.4e) but the problems of poor relationships were not acknowledged (C.2.5b). Leadership skills were important but were less often discussed (C.2.3i).
When they were constructing the system I do not feel that Gordan took enough account of the strengths of his developers. He was very complimentary about their abilities while being realistic about their particular strengths and weaknesses (S.4.9). However he did not seem to allow sufficiently for the influence of the individuals on the quality of the product. For example, the lack of experience with the prototyping methodology should have alerted him to the danger of the project getting out of control as the management of prototyping is known to be difficult and had been flagged up at an early stage (S.4.8). Phase I was much bigger than planned in part because they had difficulty stopping the prototyping process (C.2.1a). A better understanding of the effect of the individual's lack of experience would have caused Gordan to manage the project more closely. Similarly, if George had taken more account of Kevin's lack of IT experience he might not have been appointed and this would probably have had a major impact on the problems of phase II (C.2.5a). Another area where respect for ability allowed the impact of inexperience to be ignored was in the design of phase I (C.2.2). One of the difficulties that Gordan would have had in addressing this is the difficulty there can be in managing IT staff (see discussion relating to the IT profession).
The Multinational project began with a prototyping process model but by phase III had switched to a much more traditional development approach. Unfortunately, I did not observe for long enough to see the impact of this switch, however it is interesting that it was largely brought about through the influence of Jane and Colin (C.1.4g). Although Gordan highlighted the need for the organisation to learn from the problems of phase II, I do not think he supported the move (C.1.4.h). If he had been more aware of the impact of Jane's experience in this respect, I suspect that he may not have appointed her.
One aspect that was important in Jane's appointment was her ability to be 'tough' with senior management (C.2.5b). In general personality does not seem to have been a big issue in Multinational. Although there are no definite examples where an awareness of the personality of individuals would have been useful, I suspect an explicit consideration of other personal qualities might have affected the appointment of Stuart to lead phase II (C.2.3i) and Jane's appointment (C.2.5b).
© Clare Tagg 2000