why do companies insist on fixing things that aren't broken?

[nageov3t]

recently, my company decided to overhaul one of the major apps we use. with the new hardware changes, it's faster, which is awsome, but they also totally changed the GUI, which leaves everyone outside of the dev. team scratching our heads.

more eye candy, but the old UI has been working great for the past 5 years. and so it's like, what's the point? why fix something that's not broken?

sometimes I really empathize with Dilbert. heh.

 

[MrChad]

Is it more usable? Easier to learn?

I don't have a problem with improving applications that already work reasonably well, but in my experience companies don't always take the necessary steps to ensure that their changes will actually improve the existing system.

 

[ElFenix]

with windows they add things that are broken and don't fix them

 

[JoLLyRoGer]

Sounds like the PM in charge of this change failed misearably to communicate the needs of the customer to the development team.

Were you, the end user (or your co-workers) ever approached about what functionality is most important to you and what improvments/changes you would like to see implemented and did they involve the people who actually use this application day to day at all? If not then you should have been, that's 1st grade chit for any PM worth his salt.

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: JoLLyRoGer
Sounds like the PM in charge of this change failed misearably to communicate the needs of the customer to the development team.

Were you, the end user (or your co-workers) ever approached about what functionality is most important to you and what improvments/changes you would like to see implemented and did they involve the people who actually use this application day to day at all? If not then you should have been, that's 1st grade chit for any PM worth his salt.

yup, my thoughts exactly. there are things removed that we used practically 24/7, and they even took out the limited customization that we had (being able to adjust column/row widths, etc).

 

[torpid]

Define "working great" when you refer to the old ui. Is it easier to locate the right fields and buttons now?

UI "fixes" are almost never truly fixes. They are things to reduce user error, increase how quickly one learns the app, and improve the speed of repetitive tasks (by making choices take less time).

 

[mzkhadir]

Isn't it called preventive maintainance.

 

[JoLLyRoGer]

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: JoLLyRoGer
Sounds like the PM in charge of this change failed misearably to communicate the needs of the customer to the development team.

Were you, the end user (or your co-workers) ever approached about what functionality is most important to you and what improvments/changes you would like to see implemented and did they involve the people who actually use this application day to day at all? If not then you should have been, that's 1st grade chit for any PM worth his salt.

yup, my thoughts exactly. there are things removed that we used practically 24/7, and they even took out the limited customization that we had (being able to adjust column/row widths, etc).

Wow, that's just sad. Let me guess, there was no phased implementation where both the new and the legacy system were both operational to allow for a smooth transition / debugging either. What about a training plan? Did they leave you high and dry there too?

 

[imported_xaguynamedguyx]

just because you are used to something and something new comes out that you dont really know how to use doesnt mean you should just hate it. The new thing is probably (most of the time) better and easier to use just harder for you because you have to releard

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: JoLLyRoGer

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: JoLLyRoGer
Sounds like the PM in charge of this change failed misearably to communicate the needs of the customer to the development team.

Were you, the end user (or your co-workers) ever approached about what functionality is most important to you and what improvments/changes you would like to see implemented and did they involve the people who actually use this application day to day at all? If not then you should have been, that's 1st grade chit for any PM worth his salt.

yup, my thoughts exactly. there are things removed that we used practically 24/7, and they even took out the limited customization that we had (being able to adjust column/row widths, etc).

Wow, that's just sad. Let me guess, there was no phased implementation where both the new and the legacy system were both operational to allow for a smooth transition / debugging either. What about a training plan? Did they leave you high and dry there too?

once again correct. lol.

 

[Vic]

Reinvestment costs are dollar-for-dollar tax write-offs.

 

[JoLLyRoGer]

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: JoLLyRoGer

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: JoLLyRoGer
Sounds like the PM in charge of this change failed misearably to communicate the needs of the customer to the development team.

Were you, the end user (or your co-workers) ever approached about what functionality is most important to you and what improvments/changes you would like to see implemented and did they involve the people who actually use this application day to day at all? If not then you should have been, that's 1st grade chit for any PM worth his salt.

yup, my thoughts exactly. there are things removed that we used practically 24/7, and they even took out the limited customization that we had (being able to adjust column/row widths, etc).

Wow, that's just sad. Let me guess, there was no phased implementation where both the new and the legacy system were both operational to allow for a smooth transition / debugging either. What about a training plan? Did they leave you high and dry there too?

once again correct. lol.

Well if what you're saying is true then that's pretty pathetic. At a minimum there should at least be some change documentation to accompany the new version of the old applicaition and it's just bad practice to all of a sudden "throw the switch" on an entire company with changes such as these. It leaves no time to evaluate the new system, ID problems and implement fixes before the official cut-over date. Who is it you work for again? At least they should have a couple of training days to bring everyone up to speed.

 

[GeekDrew]

Of course, loki8481 works for an IT organization that expects some level of competency out of their techs... I'm not defending a bad product, but I think that it is less of a problem for people such as himself and his coworkers to adapt to a new program that is required, suddenly, than it would be for just any company out there that happened to throw the switch on a new program.