INDEX | ORGANISATION | TIME LINE | PEOPLE | STORY | RESEARCH METHOD | COMMENTARY | FINDINGS | HELP | BOTTOM

Phase I (Sep 92 - Jun 93): User involvement

'Also the people who had the major input into the prototype I think should have been a far wider range of people. They attempted to make it a wide range of people but the people just weren't interested, couldn't be bothered, weren't available so they ended up with one or two people basically specifying the system. They have their own viewpoint and it turns out that now we've got a systems that is great for them perhaps not so good for other people. ...

There was Keith and David. David basically had the most say and he was a manager in Multinational at the time. And he was charged with making sure this thing happened and he had a lot of time to put into it. Other people, ... it wasn't really their problem, you know, they had other things to manage all day and so their input doesn't come into it so much and then of course they're forced to use it a year later.

It doesn't really do what they want in terms of ???. Also, David was a manager, wasn't really aware of all the working practices lower down, exactly how some things were done. ... I think that people, certain people, ... pressure should have been brought to bear. They should have been given some responsibility for their corner as it were. And that I think would have got them a more balanced view. ... '

X042 page 002.03 (tape 05.2.02) Matt Notes/Tape 14/06/94

Social influence: Team: Composition
Technical influence: Tasks: Requirements definition


Recording
Story
Social influence
Technical influence

INDEX | ORGANISATION | TIME LINE | PEOPLE | STORY | RESEARCH METHOD | COMMENTARY | FINDINGS | HELP | TOP

© Clare Tagg 2000