A Conversation for Abi's Ethical Labyrinth

The contractors conundrum

Post 1

Is mise Duncan

If a job of work has an amount of time allocated to it on a project plan or budget, and you know you can get it done much quicker than that but you get paid by the hour; should you inform the project manager or just take your time and slack off?


The contractors conundrum

Post 2

Wand'rin star

Who drew up the plan?
If you did, tell them and you'll get the next bigger contract (well, in a perfect world you will)
If they did, shut up and write h2g2 articles. No ignorant manager likes being shown up by a cocky contractor


The contractors conundrum

Post 3

Is mise Duncan

If I drew up the plan it would be as organised as my bedroom smiley - smiley - avoidance of "management" and the Peters principal is one of the reasons I got into this lark in the first place.

but - saving a client money is good for a reputation, therefore enhances job prospects and renewals ... but obviously, saving a client money costs me money.. a fairly clear conflict of interests?


The contractors conundrum

Post 4

Bald Bloke

I spy an oportunity for making hay and making the client very happy.

Is there any part of this project which *Really* must be done by you at home?smiley - smiley

I would go the not telling them option and padding it out a *little*.
ie keeping the actual progress ahead of the reported progress.
Any slacking can be done near the end of the project, with all the twiddly bits that always take a long time to get done.

If you tell them they will go and tighten the estimates for future jobssmiley - sadface
If you deliver early and under budget they get to expect it every time.smiley - sadface

After all if you can deliver on budget and on time the client is going to be very pleased, if in the process your golf handicap falls.
Then so be it.smiley - smiley

But before you take this option are you absolutly sure that there are no nasties lurking in the project.

And whatever happens don't take up the slack at the start of the project. There's nothing worse than starting out with something that looks looks like its going to run early and slacking off, only for it foul up after you have absorbed the slacksmiley - sadface


The contractors conundrum

Post 5

Is mise Duncan

I hasten to add (or perhaps amble along slowly to add) that we are not talking about the current schedule which is as crowded as a seabird colony but about a previous job I took...and basically took it reasonably easy smiley - winkeye....but had pangs of guilt (or possibly a deeply suppressed socialist impulse or work ethic), but not when it came to the end of the month smiley - winkeye

OK - what if it was government work? I'd say goofing off in, say, military procurement is less bad than in medical admin..? Hmm - its a slippery issue...

*alt-tab switches back to see if his long compile has completed...yup*


The contractors conundrum

Post 6

Wand'rin star

There's no contest, because you wouldn't be working in military procurement. Choose something a bit more likely and further down the slope.


The contractors conundrum

Post 7

Peet (the Pedantic Punctuation Policeman, Muse of Lateral Programming Ideas, Eggcups-Spurtle-and-Spoonswinner, BBC Cheese Namer & Zaphodista)

I'd take up the end-of-project "slack" with thorough testing; something the management never allow enough time for. When you quote them that you'll have finished the last line of code by Monday morning, they tell the customer it'll be delivered on Monday morning. smiley - sadface


The contractors conundrum

Post 8

a girl called Ben

Been there, done that, clients saved money, I made less. Sorry to be a goodie two-shoes, but it is not actually an ethical dilemma in my mind.

There was a time where the politics in the client caused them to spend an entirely un-neccesary £100,000 (this is a UK non-departmental govt body, btw). I did think of saying to them 'give me the f*****g web-site for six weeks, and sack me at the end if you don't like what I have done with it', but I needed the money too much, and, as I said, the internal politics would have prevented it that sort of reality-check.

And there was another time when a multi-national technology company spent at least $250,000 mopping up after one incompetent permanent member of staff. We tried every single thing we could think of short of abh or food-poisoning to get him off our case, but once again internal politics blew it. I can still make former colleagues twitch at the mention of his name. All in all, millions were wasted on that programme. And not single figure millions either.

So a lot of the time you are prevented from saving the client money.

But as I have said, it is not an ethical dilemma in my mind. I will do the best I am permitted to do for the client, even if it is against my apparent short-term interests.

B


Key: Complain about this post