[408] in Project_DB
Re: Projects by Practice
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Robert V. Ferrara)
Mon Dec 28 15:10:52 1998
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 15:10:36 -0500
To: dbaron@MIT.EDU (Dennis Baron), Mike Barker <mbarker@MIT.EDU>
From: "Robert V. Ferrara" <rferrara@MIT.EDU>
Cc: project-db@MIT.EDU, littell@MIT.EDU
Dennis, for now, I'm Office-MR. Within a few weeks, either the MR group
will decide they want to use it or they dont and it will be eliminated.
Cheers, Bob
EST, Dennis Baron wrote:
>
>Well, I really wasn't trying to comment on the Project Database - just the
way
>it was being presented to people on the web.
>
>>The best way to remove the "NONE" entries may be for the practice directors
>>to review such entries and modify the projects.
>
>Good idea. Unfortunately I think the way it works is that the NONE causes
none
>of the practice directors look at those projects! This is probably just an
>indication of a broken practice - project team leaders not talking to the
>Practice directors when they start projects. ("Hey, if I leave this blank
(or
>put 'adhoc' I won't have to think about the customer side of the project or
>talk to one of them Practice Directors." :-) )
>
>I'd also like to understand who wears the Practice hat for "Commons" - JDB?
>And Jim Morgan for "OFFICE-MR"?
>
>>Although accidental, the adhoc process does provide a "home" for projects
>>which don't seem to fit in one of the five processes.
>
>I think this is equally dangerous. How is that decision made? By whom?
>
>Just my thoughts. Dennis
>
>
>
