>> It sounds like the PM also wanted to pivot. But someone between you and the VP on the org chart didn't.
Most of the department was still on Waterfall, we were doing Agile. They mandated we use their old tech stack since we opted for Agile instead of their standard Waterfall project management. This was communicated as a compromise, not knowing how old the tech stack was.
There was a lot of back and forth and the PM showed incredibly courage to stand up to the department heads. Using the old tech stack was a compromise, but in the end, started slowing the project down. Once I was able to explain in more layman terms how it was affecting the project, the people with more say allowed us to pivot.
There was minimal backlash, once we pivoted. I made sure we started hitting goals and gaining traction quickly to offset any arguments they were going to make. I knew we'd be under a microscope, so I put in the extra work to make sure we were covered.
Most of the department was still on Waterfall, we were doing Agile. They mandated we use their old tech stack since we opted for Agile instead of their standard Waterfall project management. This was communicated as a compromise, not knowing how old the tech stack was.
There was a lot of back and forth and the PM showed incredibly courage to stand up to the department heads. Using the old tech stack was a compromise, but in the end, started slowing the project down. Once I was able to explain in more layman terms how it was affecting the project, the people with more say allowed us to pivot.
There was minimal backlash, once we pivoted. I made sure we started hitting goals and gaining traction quickly to offset any arguments they were going to make. I knew we'd be under a microscope, so I put in the extra work to make sure we were covered.