views:

160

answers:

8

Is there a way of offering the flexibility of Excel/Access development that end users love while instilling centralised IT management so data and logic is secure, backed up, version controlled etc. The common options are to re-write in C#/ASP.Net/Java/Python/Your Choice, but that takes away control from the users. Is there a better way, and what do you do at your site?

There is a universal issue of users creating fantastically useful Excel/Access mini-apps that the IT department would like to bring under control. Users love the flexibility that Excel affords, especially on the fly changes, graphing and data import/export. In Access we have brilliant QBE. The downside is that after a short while there are legions of out of control spreadsheets/mdbs which are mission critical, with lots poorly understood business logic, and brittle code, they're a pain to support especially as staff move on.

This puts the IT dept in an awkward spot, they'd like to support these apps, but don't know enough about them. This is made more difficult as they are typically insecure with zero documentation.

+1  A: 

If it's mission critical, and it's in Access or Excel, is built poorly, and no one understands it, it is probably time to rebuild it properly.

Lance Fisher
Hence my question, how do you do 'properly' and still leave the users in control? Or is that just impossible?
MrTelly
@MrTelly: involve the users in the production of requirement specs, design specs, even technical specs if they like. Users with domain knowledge should be able to express themselves in natural language and not just raw code ;)
onedaywhen
+5  A: 

You could try a hybrid approach: Allow your users to use Excel/Access to home-brew their own, specialized tools, but take the mission-critical stuff and put it under IT control. There are a few strategies that could help you with this:

  • Make sure that your IT department is firm on VBA. Not the "yeah-everybody-can-write-a-few-lines-of-basic" type of knowledge, but in-depth training, just like you would if it were a less simple programming language. Although "real programmers" will tell you otherwise, it is possible to write large, stable applications in VBA.
  • If you currently have the data in Access databases, move away from that and migrate it to an SQL Server. This allows you to do centralized backup and management, while still giving your power users the flexibility to "link" these SQL Server tables to their Access frontend.
  • Commonly used business logic should be under control of your IT department. This can be done either with VBA, by creating an Access library that is linked by your users, or in any of the .net languages, using COM interop. The latter sounds more complicated than it is, and it will increase the satisfaction of your IT department, since developing in .net is just much more rewarding than VBA (version control possible, etc.).
Heinzi
Speaking of large, stable apps I have a system built Access 97/2000 with 160 tables, 350 forms, 450 reports and 70K lines of code. The biggest problem is that is should've been upsized to SQL Server long ago However I find working in Access and VB6 to be quite rewarding.
Tony Toews
A: 

When the 'users' are in control it usual means one particular person is in control of the architecture, design, coding and documentation... except they normally omit the documentation step. Source control and bug reporting, the touchstone of software development, is usually absent. Few instances of code reuse, due to the nature of Office apps (code modules usually embedded into documents) and VBA (little OOP, most VBA coders don't use Implements, etc). All this means that the resulting applications are not subject to get proper scrutiny and quality can suffer, meaning there are likely to be maintenace issues, escpecially when that one user leaves. I know because I used to be that person ;)

So in order to satisfy the IT department, the proper process needs to be applied. That one 'power' user can continue to own the design and coding but will get peer review, perhaps the serivces of a technical author and a dedicated tester, be required to use source control, perhaps consider integrating with enterprise systems, etc.

onedaywhen
+7  A: 

Having been of both sides of the fence I would go after the root cause of the problem. Why do uses make their own little apps? Because it is too hard/expensive/time consuming/never turns out right when they go through the “proper” channels.

The other thing is they tend to know the business very well so whilst their coding might not be very good their knowledge of what needs doing is very good.

So what can we do to combat this problem? I personally think their should be a small team of people within IT whose job (or one of their jobs) is to develop these small applications. They should work very closely with the end users and not be locked in the ivory tower of IT.

In my current role I’m on the non-IT side of the fence, I have a few quite major applications that needed to be developed so I asked for an install of visual studio and some space on an SQL server. I had my request denied. So I just asked for SQL server space, again request denied (each request taking about a week to go through) So in the end I’m “stuck” in access.

Now these are very nice access apps with version control, comments in the (shock!) and all the other nice things but at the end of the day I was trying to do things the “right” way and ended up being forced down the access route. So when my apps try to get scaled up and I’m quoting a long time for a rewrite who is to blame?

Kevin Ross
The main reason a user creates their own app is often to save time. If it takes more than a couple of days to get something going with IT, they will not ask again. They simply do not have the time. Once the user has built their own app, it often becomes their "child", and they will defend it from IT, so there are political issues in stepping in.
Remou
I have found it very strange indeed how often management is consulted on large new applications, and the ground floor users are ignored, or briefly interviewed, if this has been the case, there will already be a level of mistrust. This area is by no means a purely technical one.
Remou
A: 

There is no getting around the use of Excel/Access. It's what's available, and still very powerful and flexible. The best thing to do is offer some guidelines as to how files should look and be set up. If everyone is using similar standards then the files will live longer and more productive lives, beyond the creator's tenure at the company.

guitarthrower
+3  A: 

Have you considered looking at SharePoint for department-level applications? Many professional developers will balk at the idea of using Sharepoint for "application development," but it truthfully can be a great way for "power users" to start putting their data and tools in a managed framework.

With SharePoint, you can manage the overall structure of the site and then set up users with elevated permissions within their respective departments. There are some great 3rd-party tools to help with keeping an eye on what's going on in your SharePoint site.

SharePoint is not a silver bullet by any means, but it is great for many multi-user applicatinos that need to keep up with a list of data.


(The following is not really related to my above answer, but your question really hit home and I thought I'd share my similar experiences and insights.)

Our company will be going through a similar process in the near future. I'm on the "end user" side of things and can sympathize with a lot of what Kevin Ross said. Sometimes Access and Excel are simply the best tools available for me to get the job done.

Here's an example: I was asked several years ago to come up with a system for creating Purchase Orders to a vendor in China for product for which there is a 3 month lead time. Our ERP software had a few features for procurement, but nothing that even came close to the complexity of the situation we were facing. Years later, after going through several iterations of the application in Excel (VLOOKUP was a lifesaver), Access ("So that is why people using relational databases. Awesome!), and back in Excel ("let's not make this so complicated"), I still find that these Micorosft Office apps are the best tools to get the job done.

What's the cost to not use these tools to get the job done?

  • Contract work to our ERP vendor to add a special feature for this ordering process: are you kidding me? We'd likely pay tens of thousands of dollars for an unflexible monolithic application with horrendous user experience...and we would still end up back in Excel.
  • Buy third party software designed for this exact process: I've seen an on-site demo of software that does exactly what I want for our procurement process. It starts at $100,000. There are probably other tools that we can get for a few thousand dollars, but at that price point, I've already emulated most of their features in my own application.
  • Try to finish the job "by hand." : Ha! I'm a programmer at heart, which means I'm lazy. If it takes a solid week of sitting at a desk to work up a purchase order (it actually did take this long), you can bet I'm going to work up a solution so that it only takes me a few hours (and now it does). Perhaps the guy after me will go back to doing most of it by hand, but I'll use the tools in my toolbox to save myself time and stress.

It's so hard to find the perfect application to allow for maximum creativity on the user end but still allow IT to "manage" it. Once you think you've found a solution for one thing, you realize it doesn't do something else. Can I write I printable report in this solution like I used to do in Access? Can I write complicated Excel formulas that tie multiple data sources together from different sheets ("You want me to learn what? No, I've never heard of a "SQuirre**L** query" before. VLOOKUP is just fine thankyouvermuch)? Can I e-mail the results to the people in my department? Can it automatically pull data from our back-end database like I do in Excel and Access? Can I write my own code, VBA or otherwise, to make my job easier? The list goes on.

In the end, the best advice I can give to any IT manager in your situation is to respect the other workers at your company. Let them know their work is important (even if it's only useful to them and the guy at the next desk over). Let them know you are not trying to make their job harder. Don't assume they are morons for creating mission-critical applications in office productivity software; they are just trying to get the job done with the tools at hand and are usually quite capable and intelligent people. Invite them to explore different solutions with you instead of just removing the tools they currently have in their toolbox and then replacing them with ones they don't know how to use.

At the end of the day, if you have users who are smart enough to shoot themselves in the foot by creating complicated apps in Excel and Access, they are probably smart enough to learn to use the appropriate tools to accomplish the same tasks. Invest the time and energy to involve them in the process and you will have a solution that works for everyone at the end.

Ben McCormack
A: 

You've got some excellent answers regarding dealing with the folks and the business side of things. So my response will be more technical.

If you are going to redesign the app have the developers work in the same offices as the users. Given the users updates every day or two. If the users have any minor suggestions give those to the users within a day or two. Ultra Frequent Application Deployment

Give the power users an Access MDB/ACCDB linked to the tables with a bunch of starter queries. Let them create the queries they need to export the data to Excel for their own purposes and distribution to clients.

Tony Toews
"have the developers work in the same offices as the users" -- in this day and age?!
onedaywhen
Absolutely be in the same offices. You want the system to work for the users then hvae the developers be part of them for the duration. Oh, you don't want interruptions but if a dev is grabbing a coffee why not have the user ask for a snmall tweak that would take only a few minutes to implemment. No better way for the devs to truly understand how a given office or department paper flow works and to fine tune the system.
Tony Toews
I agree with Tony. My most successful projects have all been ones where I have real face-to-face contact with the users. This is most important in the planning stages, in fact, but as Tony says, for his iterative development method (which is exactly what I use, though releasing less often than Tony), it's also helpful. My current most active project has me working offsite most of the week, with one half day or full day in the client's office going over the new features, issues with previous releases and plans for the next one.
David-W-Fenton
"dev is grabbing a coffee why not have the user ask for a snmall tweak that would take only a few minutes to implemment[sic]" -- do you even *have* a change control process?!
onedaywhen
Funny, to get significant proportion of our users in the same physical building as the devs, designers, product managers, domain experts, testers, etc you'd have to hold a conference... which we do once a year. But for day to day work? Get real.
onedaywhen
+3  A: 

I would second one of Kevin Ross's main points:

I personally think their should be a small team of people within IT whose job (or one of their jobs) is to develop these small applications. They should work very closely with the end users and not be locked in the ivory tower of IT.

I think any IT department that has a lot of users using Access/Excel should have at least one properly trained and experienced specialist in developing apps on those platforms. That person would be the go-between to make sure that:

  1. IT's priorities and policies get properly implemented in the home-grown apps.

  2. the end users get expert help in converting their home-grown efforts into something more stable and well-designed.

I would second Tony's point that whoever works with the end users in revising these apps to meet IT standards should work side-by-side with the users. The Access/Excel specialist should be an advocate for the end users, but also for the IT policies that have to be followed.

I also think that an IT department could have a specialist or two on staff, but should also have a full-time professional Access and/or Excel developer as a consultant, since the on-staff people could probably handle day-to-day issues and management of the apps, while the professional consultant could be called in for planning and architecture and for the implementation of more complex feature sets.

But all of that would depend on the size of the organization and the number of apps involved. I don't know that it would be desirable to have someone on salary who is nothing but an Access/Excel specialist, precisely because of the problem you get with all salaried employees compared to consultants -- the employees don't see as wide a variety of situations as an active consultant with the same specialization is likely to see and thus the consultant is going to have broader experience.

Of course, I recognize that many companies do not like to outsource anything, or not something that important. I think that's unwise, but then again, I'm the person that gets hired by the people who decide to do it!

David-W-Fenton