CSS3 Rocks! Please use latest browser version.
Welcome to Walter Moore Canada's Blog. These comments are strictly opinion. You can disagree!
Showing posts with label Concepts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Concepts. Show all posts

Thursday, January 21, 2010

Escalation



Published 2003-03-31

Just ranting about escalation….
The objective of escalation is to bring something into higher priority and focus resources. In small business escalation is not usually an issue, there are usually only a few people to inform and everyone knows everybody. In enterprise class systems escalation becomes much more complex. Escalation is usually associated with problems but not necessarily(you can escalate good news). There are 2 sides… the escalator(person escalating a problem) and escalatee(person problem is being escalated to for investigation). 
When talking about problem escalation I find many enterprises lacking. Some have done wonderful jobs but most need work. Many shops have binders with contact lists, memos and hand written notes. Half the time is spent contacting the wrong people and often required contacts are never made. Other shops have rigid rules for escalation that often create excessive escalation. One shop I worked for used memos that would say something like…
If you have problems…
    Call 416-999-2222 Sun-Thu between 11pm-7am. No more than 4 rings!
    Call 705-555-1212 on the weekend
    Call 416-555-2244 at all other times.
I am unavailable Mon-Fri from 6-7pm, I will call you back after 7pm if paged.    

That was just the first level support contact, then you had to contact business and suppliers that each had their own escalation… And people were wondering why escalation took 90+ minutes at times.
Escalation needs clear guidelines – Rules are inherently inflexible and escalation requires extreme flexibility. Even if your internal escalation is rigid you have no control over external escalation.
Escalation Intervals – How long do you wait for support to call back? How long do you give first level support before escalating to second level? You need an escalation matrix that considers priority and impact. Example: Critical problems need faster escalation than others.
Does the problem need escalation? Some businesses escalate everything immediately. Although this may sound good it easily creates problems. An impact assessment should be completed before escalation is implemented. Perhaps the problem can wait to avoid costs like over-time. Others only escalate when everything crashes around them.
Once it is determined a problem should be escalated the escalation process should have structure to provide 1st, 2nd,3rd… level contacts for customer, internal support and suppliers but allow flexibility to “skip levels” as needed. Often internal support escalation is handled correctly but the ball is dropped when contacting customers and suppliers. How many times have you missed informing the right people? The escalation process must ensure ALL related contacts are informed.
Don’t call Jim “because he knows the solution”. Call the appropriate support and inform them that Jim has the solution. This ensures that bugs are worked out quickly… no one wants to be called at 3am. Another common problem for effective escalation. If you call Jim and bypass the escalation process the real issue of having the wrong contact never gets addressed. Next week(or day) Jim will get called again. Jim is probably not going to be very happy. Escalators must follow escalation as defined to ensure bugs in the process are addressed.
Escalation process should allow a flexible contact solution. Requiring specific contact types(like pager) are limiting and should be avoided. The contact person should have the ability to maintain how they are to be contacted(home,pager,cell…) but the process should not attempt to support memos like noted above.  Since contacts have the ability to maintain their contact details they assume the responsibility for the information.
Escalation requires constant reviewing to ensure the appropriate contacts are defined. Some companies think that once their escalation is defined they are done. Wrong! Escalation constantly needs fine tuning. I have seen many great systems fail because the data became outdated. A distributed ownership model is critical to a successful implementation. Contacts own their personal information, management owns the resources. Each is responsible to ensure their data is accurate.
Escalation requires ownership/responsibility. One of the most frequent problems I have seen is the lack of ownership when problems arise. A clear path to ownership must be maintained. Owners are responsible for the resource, they didn’t buy it! Ownership ensures at least someone is prioritizing the issue… they may not be the ones to do the work.
Escalation process must be accessible from various platforms(mainframe, PC, server, PDA…). No use having a great system that escalators can’t access. In addition it needs an API to integrate with standard business management tools like problem management.
I can go on and on about this subject… I think you get the idea so I will stop now.

XHTML



Updated 2009-11-25
Most development software now codes XHTML compliant tags. There are many smart phones that require XHTML to display properly. Welcome to the XML world. Was it really that bad? Now get ready for CSS3 and DHTML5.0.

Published 2003-03-31

XHTML is the evolution of HTML. The concept is simple… Make HTML documents into an XML compliant document.
Why should I convert?
XHTML is the “new” HTML and many new devices require compliance. XHTML applies strict rules which enforces standards. XHTML can be used as XML. The only choice you have is when… this is inevitable.
Why not?
If you only intend to support PC type platforms with standard browsers there is no value in converting. Every page in your site will have to be converted with no visible improvements… How do you justify the costs. You may be able to wait until your web development tool automatically generates XHTML compliant code. If you do not intend to support PDA/Phones there is no reason to convert.
Problems….
Virtually all web tools at the moment write standard HTML. After converting documents all future HTML edits will have to be reviewed for XHTML compliance manually until your tools write XHTML. In XHTML ALL tags must have a closing tag(
must have
). In XHTML tags that do not have closing tags must end with a “/” symbol(
must be
). This includes meta tags as well..
Even if you are diligent and always provide closing tags in your HTML you will have to do many adjustments. All tables must have a TBODY tag. All tags and properties must be in lowercase. Inline CSS & Script encapsulated in comments must be in a CDATA block. These are just some of the more common issues. If you use strict XHTML, style properties only exist in CSS and will require even more adjustments. I recommend you review W3C standards for XHTML at http://www.w3c.org/
How to Convert
There is a lot more than most people think to convert DHTML to XHTML but I have found some good cheats…
There are several tools out there that will automatically convert DHTML to XHTML. I strongly recommend you use these rather than manually adjusting your HTML. You can convert the core site pages immediately then convert the rest as time permits. For tools you can use http://cgi.w3.org/cgi-bin/tidy that provides an online solution or you can download WebMatrix from http://www.asp.net/. I think Tidy provides the best implementation. There is a version of Tidy you can download and run from your PC… look on W3C site.
No matter what you decide, start writing all new documents with XHTML standards. It will save you having to re-write them later. That said you might notice this document is NOT XHTML compliant. I intend to convert  the entire demo site at one time so I am waiting till then… ;-)

Title Parameter



Updated 209-11-24
Notice no one uses the status bar for help anymore. It used to be used on almost every site. Everyone now uses the Title parameer or new custom modules that perform these yellow popups allowing very complex displays rather than the simplistic text display available with the Title parameter…some even look like the classic “balloon help”.  I suspect that these more advanced help module concepts will eventally make it into HTML standards(maybe reference a section of the page like a DIV or snippet of code as the title parm). I have been noticing that sometimes the help flashes on/off when movong over plain text that is in a SPAN with a title parameter. Quite frustrating.

Published 2000-09-02

The title parm is now available in both IE3+ and NN6+. What is it for? It provides those little pop-up help tips when you move the mouse over something. In previous NN browsers this was only available for pictures(Alt parm). This help is now available on ANY tag. For example, move your mouse over this text. Notice the pop-up help appears. Move the mouse over IE3+ or NN6+ to get a better idea of a more common usage. Another reason I supported NN6.
Title is what help should be. None of this writing to statusbar. Clients do not have to look anywhere, help hits them over the head. I had created a Form 7 process for IE3(only) that did the exact same thing before this was built in. This site is changing to exclusively Title help.
How do you do it? Simple, just put TITLE=”What you want to say” on virtually any tag.
I have more stuff on this in How To demos at my website.

IFrames... What Frames Should Have Been



Updated 2009-11-25
Iframes are everywhere now. Unfortunately they are being abused by advertisers. They are still a great solution and have provided me with numerous benefits. Still no autosizing capabilities ;(

Updated 2002-01-07

My demonstration site uses IFrames exclusively. Without them there would be no “FloatAway” toolbar. Now if they only had an automatic resizing and true transparency… Never satisfied ;-)

Published 2000-09-02

Ever use a frames design? Restrictive aren’t they? You can’t have a frame anywhere you want. A frameset document is a particular type of document. Wouldn’t it be nice to have a frame anywhere you wanted in a window. Wouldn’t it be nice to have frames that can be moved around the window at will? That is what IFrames improves on the old frames(among other things).
The biggest drawback with using IFrames was that they were only supported on IE3+. Not anymore. Netscape V6 now supports them. It is not quite as complete as IE’s version but still it is a major step forward.
Their biggest advantage is they allow a developer to create a site with multiple small windows interacting…just like many Windows applications. This is really cool and opens up the potential for a true client server model on the web.
Don’t get me wrong, frames are great. This demo site still uses frames because when making a simple 3 frame page the Frameset means you do not have to code for resizing and other weird things. I could have used IFrames, but they are not best for this particular site. I do use them on sites that need more complex interaction between many frames.
If you have a choice and you only need to support IE and NN6 think about IFrames. There are a lot more possibilities once you use them.

Rapid Application Development(RAD)



Originally Published 1997-09-25

Rapid Application Development(RAD) is tools and methodologies. Here are a few opinions on both.
I have been using RAD tools since 1995 but have used the methods long before there was a name “RAD”. I have seen RAD benefits and abuse. Whether you like it or not it is today’s development platform.
I have created a short list of things to keep in mind when you step into RAD. They include requirements, benefits, disadvantages and a summary. In no way should this be considered a complete list.

Requirements:

  • Excellent leadership. Somebody has to point the technicians in the right direction and let them go.
  • Top skilled technicians. If you don’t have the motivated people to do the work it won’t get done. They also have to understand business requirements and be able to interface with clients.
  • Supportive infrastructure. This is two sided. You have to inform others of change ASAP, others must be co-operative in supporting your goals.
  • Co-operative clients. Some clients want everything yesterday or do not calculate business value.
  • Everyone has to “buy in” to the process. It requires extreme dedication by all involved.
  • Best tools for the environment. Because a tool is great does not mean it is best for your site. On the other hand the environment should be open in structure to allow the best tool.
  • Compensate staff. If you don’t recognize these achievers you will loose your most valuable asset, your staff. Make sure no one steals your investment!

Benefits:

  • You get business benefits very fast($$$$).
  • Time boxing really allows you to focus on deliverable components.
  • Due to factors like iterative development more client satisfaction. Clients are involved from beginning to end.
  • If done right you work out more initial requirement bugs before installation.
  • You reduce the moving target syndrome.
  • Focalizing data into one view instead of many screens.
  • RAD’s usual focus is on high return developments. Usually related to the financial sectors of the business. In my experience 10-1 payback in first year is easily obtainable.
  • Reusable objects make future developments even faster.
  • Did I mention very FAST and very high client satisfaction.

Disadvantages:

  • It is like college development projects. You would produce something that performed the required functions, looked good, but usually was not the best quality. Due to time constraints you submit what you have accomplished and take credit.
  • The client usually gets a shell of what they want with several sections to be added in future projects(if you get to them).
  • Poor leadership can result in projects failing to achieve objectives.
  • If the technicians are low skilled you will never achieve objectives. Regardless of leadership.
  • It burns out good technicians at an alarming rate.
  • Because RAD is usually used on projects that have never been attempted many “work around” coding methods are used.
  • Initial project requirements are usually under estimated.
  • Time boxing makes technicians compromise on solutions.
  • The target still moves, just faster.
  • Client expectations go through the roof. Suddenly they can’t wait six months. Even though before RAD you told them two years or more.

Summary:

Sounds pretty negative doesn’t it? Surprise….
RAD can be great for your business. Although it has some drawbacks the return on investment(ROI) can’t be beat. Time boxing is a mandatory element(unfortunately)! If you use top notch leaders and technicians, keep them happy and make sure no one steals them without a fight you can reduce the disadvantages dramatically.
Using the methodology and tools for Internet development is a logical evolution of the client server model. Recommend you implement Object Oriented(OO) methods regardless of tools. Make it challenging, rewarding and above all, FUN!
Something to think about….
You look at a piece of machinery. It cost $2,000,000 and maintenance will be another $2,000,000 a year. It saved or makes $10,000,000 benefits each year and will last five years before you dispose of it. Would you buy it? Would you be happy? Probably, 500% ROI per year would make most of us happy.
Now, you have employees, some who have produced solutions that either saved or made the company $10,000,000(plus subsequent years). Would you pay them $2,000,000 per year? I doubt it. If they are lucky they get a bonus and/or a raise of $5,000. What is the difference? You made an investment and got back the same return either way.
The opposite is true as well. If the machinery keeps breaking down or not performing it’s function you replace it.
I know it is not feasible to compensate at this level but doesn’t the compensation most companies give seem inadequate. Loosing good investments because you won’t pay an extra $10-20,000 just doesn’t make sense. The costs just trying to find another good employee would be substantially higher(plus training etc.). In my experience good employees produce 5-10 times the average employee(more for below average). They are extremely valuable assets. Treat them that way. If they are good, your payback is worth it.
The key truly is the people.

About Ultra RAD

You heard it here first. That is because I have termed this type of development. It is different than RAD in that it is specifically designed for projects that take less than 5 months. Once you have implemented several RAD solutions using OO methodologies many new projects suddenly can shift from 6-8 months to 3-6 months. Although the tools are the same the methodology changes. The process is streamlined even further. Timelines are tightened. Reusable objects are a must.