Question:
Brooks says that adding people to a late project makes it even later (Brooks 1975). Some schedule estimation techniques seem to indicate that adding people to a project can shorten development time. Is this a contradiction? Why or why not?
Both statements are true, there is no contradiction at both parties because both are referring into a good result or techniques for everybody.
For me it’s not a contradiction to Brooks point of view because what Brook mean is a late project and late project is still late and can even result to be later if a team should add a person to it. There is nothing new or can change the status of a late project to an earlier one if we add new person. Adding a person means new adjustment and basically can never change the fact that the project is late. It’s definitely true that adding one will make it even more late because you need to orient the new person, as if the group should start at the very beginning. Its not appropriate if the team added a person and just let the person study the previous stages that the group undergone.
What was the second article mean is that in developing a project or starting a project would be a big help if the personnel who will develop it is many. The more the merrier, as what the old saying goes. It’s an expression of a project to be more effective if it has lots of idea or head that are working. Two heads is better than one, right? In most cases, developing a system would mostly preferred by group and it’s an advantage to a group who has a more personnel. Task could be divided evenly and just.
No comments:
Post a Comment