Ask HN: How do you deal with a "death march"?

Righting a project requires figuring out what the root of the problem is. A stakeholder demanding an unfeasible requirement may seem like the problem, but it could be deeper such as beaurocratic reasons or not having the tools / resources to pursue the right requirement. In the end you need to reset these issues to enable yourself to take a different path than the death march.

A recent project of mine was put on hold due to changing requirements and lack of focus. we waited for the client to bring the right people to the table. Then we redrafted all governing documents and got them reapproved, sometimes by new individuals. We made sure from the restart we had a feasible project with well defined goals.

Identify co-workers who also feel overwhelmed and lack confidence in the current 'mission impossible.' Begin or initiate the next meeting by gently but firmly pointing out that the current trajectory is unsustainable and self-destructive. Don't assign blame, but collectively demand a realignment, pointing out where 'just one more push' won't solve the problem.

Obviously there's not way to tell from this post, but a persistent problem I've seen in software organizations is that the sales staff are not accountable to clients or co-workers for inflated or over-optimistic promises of features or release dates. When targets are not met, client meetings often end up with an implicit passing of blame to the (absent) developers. This is a poisonous cycle that needs to be broken. One firm I knew off addressed this by bringing disappointed clients to the firm's HQ to explain to developers which features/use cases had priority. Clients felt mollified and valued, developers got valuable feedback without feeling forced into a commitment or marketing role, and sales staff took greater ownership of the relationship instead of seeing their sales as one-off zero-sum transactions. Obviously, this was politically challenging and a difficult step to take for most parties within the firm, but it increased productivity and good will considerably. It was a small firm and for many cases this approach is not easily mappable, but with the right leadership it can pay rich dividends.