Part II
Part II - The Professional Failure
(Now With Documentation, Confidence, and a Font Choice)
After the button incident, HarborView Services did what sensible organisations do when something goes wrong.
They decided to be more professional.
The Reset (Officially)
A follow-up meeting was scheduled.
This one had:
- an agenda
- a facilitator
- a slide deck titled “Reporting Experience Improvements – Phase 1”
This immediately made everyone feel safer.
The Problem (Reframed, Incorrectly)
The opening slide read:
Problem Statement: Users experience friction when completing reporting tasks.
Everyone nodded.
This was familiar language. It sounded reasonable. It was also doing absolutely nothing useful.
No one asked:
- which users
- which tasks
- which step
- compared to what
But now it was on a slide, so it felt settled.
The Discussion (Well-Run, Still Wrong)
The facilitator did an excellent job.
They kept things moving. They captured notes. They redirected tangents.
People spoke in turns.
Operations said:
“We need fewer handoffs.”
IT said:
“We can streamline the workflow.”
Compliance said:
“We’ll need guardrails.”
Leadership said:
“Let’s make sure we don’t slow the business down.”
All of this was written down.
None of it was reconciled.
The Artifact Appears
A formal feature request was created.
It had:
- a ticket number
- a description
- acceptance criteria
- three approvers
It referenced:
- “the reporting issue”
- “Phase 1”
- “the aligned approach”
This gave everyone a deep, false sense of relief.
The Spec (Confidence Peaks)
A short PRD followed.
It was clean. It was structured. It used phrases like:
- “user-centric”
- “simplified experience”
- “reduced friction”
It assumed:
- agreement on the problem
- agreement on success
- agreement on trade-offs
None of these assumptions were tested.
But the document looked done.
The Build (Efficient, Focused, Incorrect)
Development went smoothly.
Questions were answered with:
“It’s in the spec.”
Edge cases were deferred:
“Phase 2.”
Compliance concerns were noted:
“Post-MVP.”
The team delivered exactly what was asked for.
This time, no one could complain about how it was built.
The Release (Déjà Vu, But With Better Slides)
The feature shipped.
The outcome was… familiar.
- Some users loved it
- Some users were confused
- Support tickets increased again
- Compliance raised flags again
- Ops workarounds returned immediately
The only difference was tone.
Now, instead of frustration, there was confusion.
“But we followed the process…”
The Reckoning (Quiet, Awkward)
Another meeting.
This one had fewer jokes.
Leadership asked:
“Why are we here again?”
IT said:
“We built exactly what was approved.”
Ops said:
“This still isn’t solving the real issue.”
Compliance said:
“We flagged this risk.”
Everyone was telling the truth.
Again.
The Realisation (Too Late)
Someone finally said it out loud.
“I don’t think we ever agreed on what problem we were solving.”
The room went quiet.
Not angry quiet. Embarrassed quiet.
The kind of quiet where everyone realises:
- the work was real
- the process was followed
- the failure was collective
And polite.
The Damage
- Time lost
- Trust eroded
- Confidence shaken
- Another “Phase 2” created to hide Phase 1
HarborView hadn’t skipped discipline.
They’d performed it.
End of Part II.