The majority of my day is spent speaking to clients and consultants alike within the Pega community in Europe and beyond. There are a number of common conversation topics from lack of available talent, poor coding practices, high daily rates and salaries and how many Pega programmes are rarely delivered on time and budget, if at all.
From within the consulting community the most common gripe is that Pega has incredible functionality, but rarely reaches its ultimate goal and is delivered piece meal. This is usually a result of poor business analysis and sloppy or ill prepared development. Rarely do I speak to a client or a consultant that is genuinely satisfied with outcome of any Pega project they have been associated with. The business don’t appreciate the issues, or IT want to deliver what the business doesn’t need.
This evening I met with a senior LSA in London seeking a move from his current project. Being exceptionally unhappy with the environment and frustrated with what could be delivered, versus what will be delivered, he’s ready to throw in the towel and move on. I suspect that even when on his next project, similar frustrations will also be a reality.
Yesterday I was in conversation with a client that’s been seeking a solid LSA for some months now and though a number of highly experienced candidates have put on his desk and interviewed (certified with the right domain experience) none have been selected, much to his (and my) frustration.
Pega remains to be one to the rare offerings that continues to grow and is desperate need of new talent. My question to both clients and consultants is why? Why enter into a technology space that has a reputation of being as problematic as Pega? Am I missing something here? Don’t get me wrong, I thoroughly enjoy being involved with Pega, I’m more interested to hear from the client and consulting community as to why clients continue to have an appetite for a highly complex piece of software with a history of pitfalls.