Party A contracted party B for an initiative. B is supposed to provide services in a domain, which will help A move the needle forward in their business. In the initial days, A had big plans on the potential and visibility of the business which led to great energy and enthusiasm in both the parties to make it work. B, being new to the business, wanted to learn and deliver great results and make their mark. A made sure B doesn't have to worry about resources in terms of timely bonuses, trainings and timely feedback.
This situation went on for an year.
Over a period of time, A went through a shift in the topline management who had a different perspective about how things should happen. A had new expectations and fresh experiences from rest of the world, some relevant, some tried and tested, some erudite and some amazing! B on the other hand failed to see the perspective because of no visibility or rationale behind the changes. B was sure not only about how things can be made better in their perspective, but also was very clear about how things don't work. B, however, was very upset about the career opportunity, exposure and motivation levels with the ever demanding regular responsibilities of the contract. Though B is efficient, B failed to see things which A considers rudimentary in their deliverables.
A decided to do an analysis on how the responsibilities of the contract of B can be restructured. They estimated that 1-n responsibilities of B can be split by simple divide and conquer. 1-j, j-k, k-m and so on. By doing so, (1) we can track the progress (2) we can compensate better and (3) we can achieve simultaneous execution. The challenge however is to integrate the whole effort. We can see how big this challenge is as we move along. Considering our experience so far, this has to work.
B is not the only contracting party A has worked with.
PS: A is me and my flat-mates. B is our cook. :-P
This situation went on for an year.
Over a period of time, A went through a shift in the topline management who had a different perspective about how things should happen. A had new expectations and fresh experiences from rest of the world, some relevant, some tried and tested, some erudite and some amazing! B on the other hand failed to see the perspective because of no visibility or rationale behind the changes. B was sure not only about how things can be made better in their perspective, but also was very clear about how things don't work. B, however, was very upset about the career opportunity, exposure and motivation levels with the ever demanding regular responsibilities of the contract. Though B is efficient, B failed to see things which A considers rudimentary in their deliverables.
A decided to do an analysis on how the responsibilities of the contract of B can be restructured. They estimated that 1-n responsibilities of B can be split by simple divide and conquer. 1-j, j-k, k-m and so on. By doing so, (1) we can track the progress (2) we can compensate better and (3) we can achieve simultaneous execution. The challenge however is to integrate the whole effort. We can see how big this challenge is as we move along. Considering our experience so far, this has to work.
B is not the only contracting party A has worked with.
PS: A is me and my flat-mates. B is our cook. :-P
