Technology Plan

The Standish Group Report was a helpful article. The comparison made between bridge building and software development provided a clear understanding and greater appreciation for software development. Per the article, there is less flexibility with bridge building versus software development and for the most part one would assume flexibility is purely advantageous but per the article, flexibility could be harmful. The articles continues by stating that if a bridge fails a report is prepared outlining why it failed; however this is not the case with software development. The article also stressed on the low success rate for software projects. This fact alone indicates the importance of proper research and detailed preparation of a software project. It was disappointing to read in the article that many invest in a project that would eventually be cancelled. On the other hand, it was also enlightening to hear the success stories. The What Went Wrong article was useful in identifying what elements must be considered to avoid to failure such as proper project planning, strong business case, support from top management and setting realistic goals. I was also glad I had the opportunity to read more about LSTA in the New Funding and From Construction to Technology articles. The Gates Foundation has been greatly significant in libraries and technology; yet the New Funding article poses an interesting question “Who will be the next Gates?” when it is time for upgrading. The Technoplans vs. Technolust article suggest that a technology plan is a living document. With the constant change in technology, the plan must be able to accept changes if necessary and therefore must be a living document. The readings for this lecture made me realize that we always need to be cautious. Reading about the importance of a technology plan will prepare me for when I am confronted with technology planning activities.