Notes:
We had two development groups, one from Engineering and one from Limited.
The group in Engineering were few in numbers, a small close knit team of around 10 people. Their typical project lifecycle was counted in weeks, involved one or two developers and the scope of the projects were clear (because of the constraints of the platform).
It was not apparent to management that the methods that led to these projects being sucessful would not be applicable to the much larger bespoke development projects being undertaken in Limited. (Typical project lifcycle of a year, with 10-20 developers, with a significant scope drift and long periods of requirements capture.)
Engineering's software product was new and, because of its constrained nature, was sucessfully being developed as standard offerings. Where as Limited's software product was more mature but was developed on a bespoke basis with little opportunity for being reapplied.