Ben Allfree :: Painless Programming

Basecamp actually helped me get a job done on time yesterday. I like that. Here’s a little more about it.

Good:
* Reminded me of milestones coming due
* Helped me see that I had to do some work today
* Found it fun to knock out the checklist
* I presume the client was notified when the milestone was completed, but I’m not sure

Bad:
* Found it annoying that there is no way to paste in a big checklist from an email and have it break it into to-do items
* Was annoyed once again that creating a checklist is separate from creating a milestone
* Was annoyed that milestones don’t have any way to describe overall objectives or attach assets
* When I go to my top level dashboard, it doesn’t show milestones assigned to other people. As a manager responsible for it all, it’s going to be really lame to need to drill into each project to make sure everyone is on task.
* Clients do not like this level of involvement

Overall, Basecamp is proving that I was right to be suspicious. It is a great dumping ground for information, but it does little to wrap a process around it. I understand why they aren’t trying to impose a process, because everyone has a different view of what the correct process is, but I really feel like I need a tool that canonizes my process. Basecamp is like a road with no lane lines.

My goal is to be able to handle a high volume of startup projects. To do that, I need to run a tight process with clear boundaries, checks, and balances. Basecamp is not going to be that tool, but it might help us hold the line until we get something else put together.

I do need to say that it’s visually appealing and well designed for what it does. I have doubts though about whether people using Basecamp can really get things done.

So here’s the big question of the day: if something like Basecamp doesn’t work for you, does it mean your process is broken? Should I change my process to conform to be whatever Basecamp wants me to be? Or should I stand fast knowing that my process and rules are in place for good reason?

My problem is that software projects become adversarial as time drags on, and scope expands beyond budgets. Basecamp seems to encourage a lot of open communication and participation, as if there is no associated cost with managing all the input or fulfilling the requests. I don’t like anything that encourages discussion of expanding scope without linking it to additional costs I would incur by doing it.