Did I say that anyone can do anything in two hours if they knew what they were doing, or did I say that I could make the changes to the code in two hours, and then do the job of everyone else, and come back and make the changes to the code, and do more stuff, and eventually take months? I think I said the later. My former employer has the PHB opinion that everything should take less than a day to code and should be done in a few days, even the most complex of programs and the most advanced of features. If it takes some PHB 15 minutes to draw it in Visio, they think it should take that long to code. But they forget about the debugging, documenation, testing, production, analysis, and workstation issues cycles. I could make the changes in a day, but take weeks to complete the other stuff, and work with the helpdesk and managers to "tweak" the program to their everchanging specifications.

If it was normal stuff, and I worked in a true team environment with other people filling the roles that my former employer had me do, and I only did the coding part. I could spend a few hours or a few days to code it, and then hand it off to someone else to test it, fix the workstation issues, release it into production, etc. If I was given a blueprint for the program or told to do the analysis myself instead of an everchanging project spec that gets updated at the last minute just before I leave for the end of the day so I'll have to recode and stay extra hours, and nobody knows the whole picture but keeps changing it anyway, then it takes longer.

But if I had more projects to work on, like 34+, it would take longer because I'd have to juggle those other projects. Management still does not understand why we take longer when they bury us in projects and insane demands. Like the CDW commercial "What is the matter Norman? We are only asking for the impossible in too short an amount of time."