Here’s the second part to my earlier post on what I call “natural points of friction” for the Marketing function. Unlike Sales, I have not spent time in Engineering (other than a short and painful amount of time wallowing in C++ and the vi editor during my consulting days) so my points could be incomplete.
Regardless, the same approach applies here in that no matter what company and pretty much regardless of what stage, this is the back and forth that takes place between these two functional areas. Knowing that it will occur and taking it in stride is more than half the battle.
Engineering says about Marketing-
- Not enough guidance on what to build and for whom
- Not enough detail on what are being defined as requirements – too much gray area
- Unreasonable requirements that either represent too much marketing “fluff” or ridiculous customer requirements
- Unreasonable expectations in terms of delivery times and resource utilization
- Focusing on only visual demonstrations and “sizzle” of end-user experience
- Once we build it, why can’t you sell it (flows thru marketing to sales)
Marketing says about Engineering-
- Not enough flexibility to let the market dictate what to build next
- More than enough detail on requirements that need only a little “common sense” to figure out the gray areas
- Too much time and effort to build “basic” capabilities
- Building everything that can’t be seen
- Building only innovative and “cool” vs more utilitarian capabilities that customers require (and will pay for)
Can’t resist a comment…this is one of my favorite topics. It has been my experience (granted a limited view, but one that has seen a fair share) that most software (and most hardware) start at the technology and evolve out to the user. VERY FEW (iPhone?) start with the user and move back, even those that say they do, really don’t. I think we are still in the very early stages of usefulness and value created by software. Would someone please destroy the keyboard and mouse as the data entry devices for PCs?!?! It has been my experience that some of the gee-wiz stuff launched actually evolved from demo software. You might say DUH!, but technically most of that stuff had the exact same DNA and was never engineered to do what was ultimately envisioned for it. My point? Look how NASA writes code and then compare that to every other hacker culture. 1000 hours of documentation 100 hours of coding….
LikeLike