If you’re looking to build a community, it’s probably better to be interested in other people and their needs, rather than in yourself and yours.
Quickie: Building Community
Leave a comment
Monthly Archives: April 2022
Quickie: Value Engineering And #NoSoftware
Invitation to discuss:
#NoSoftware is the acme (or logical extreme) of Value Engineering in software development?
Quickie: Scrum Roles, Not Job Titles
In Scrum (FWIW*): “Developer”, “Scrum Master” and “Product Owner” are ***roles*** NOT job titles.
There’s no reason why these roles can’t rotate, overlap, or be shared.
*I try to avoid ever mentioning Scrum these days. I failed here. :}
ICYMI: Surely You Can’t Mean That?
Quickie: You’re Not Interested In How I Am
You’re not interested in how I am. It’s just habit, or politeness, or a bit of both, to ask. And it rankles.
Maybe you ARE intesresting how I’m feeling, or in what you might be able to do for me. As sure as hell I’m interested in how you’re feeling.
In which case, why not get to the point?
How about asking “How are you feeling?” (And see: Feelings Inventory for clues).
And/or “Would you be willing to suggest what needs of yours are not being met right now, and how I might be able to help you with that?”
From The Beginning
From The Beginning
I started my blog here on Think Different in June 2009. First on Amplify.com, then migrating to WordPress. To date there’s been something like 1175 posts (including 275 of the recently invented “Quickies”). In that time there’s been 769,615 views, and 432,849 visitors.
If you’d like to read everything, from the beginning – which probably makes for easier reading than reading backwards – here’s a handy link to all the posts in ascending (date) order.
Enjoy!
– Bob
At Face Value
At Face Value
I’ve hired a lot of people over the years. Both for my own businesses and on behalf of clients.
One thing most of these hirings have had in common is taking the successful candidates – well, all the candidates, really – at face value.
Which is to say, believing the things they say about themselves – about their character, their abilities, their experience, their needs, etc.. A bit like UPR (Unconditional Positive Regard).
Background
At the time, we needed an IEEE 754 floating point package for our commercial Modula-2 compiler. At that time our compiler only supported integer math, and for greater commercial appeal we decided floating point support was also necessary.
So we looked for someone with floating point implementation experience. We found someone who said he had such experience, and we took him at face value.
Nicklas
Let’s dive into our experience with Niklas. He was a student from Germany looking for some summer work experience in London. We had a chat over the phone, and invited him to join us. He took us up on the offer, and came to stay and work with us. His work was outstanding. Everything he had claimed, and more. He accomplished the necessary in two months. It would have taken me six.
Trust or Doubt
How likely is it that new hires are going to be impressed that the hiring manager, team or organisation doubts their word? Is doubt any constructive basis upon which to start building a positive relationship? Lack of trust, much?
How do you deal with candidates’ claims and representation of themselves? Scepticism or respect? Doubt, or trust?
– Bob
Quintessence – Concept vs Book
Quintessence – Concept vs Book
You’ve probably noticed by now that my third book in the series on Organisational Psychotherapy is titled “Quintessence” (available in ebook formats via Leanpub). The other two, previous, books in the series being titled “Hearts Over Diamonds” and “Memeology” (also both available via Leanpub, and the former also in a dead-tree version via Lulu).
The Book
Quintessence (the book) is my take on what’s involved in becoming an acme, a zenith, a pinnacle of effectiveness as a software development business or organisation. It’s how I’d go about it if I was set the challenge today – and proven through four years of building and running Familiar Ltd circa 1996-2000.
The Concept
I don’t propose that you – or anyone for that matter – copy my approach to becoming a quintessential organisation. I’d suggest it’s far better for you, your teams, and your organisation to find your own path. In that way, y’all can discover the key underlying principles, rather than cargo-culting someone else’s solution. That’s called normative learning. Maybe my book can help. Maybe not.
And yet, attaining quintessential-ness is the goal. It matters not how you get there, or even if you get there. As they say, “the journey’s the thing”.
Have you given thought to the benefits accruing from such a journey? From moving forward, closer to the quintessential?
If yes, then I’m preaching to the converted. If no, then the magical journey awaits. In either case, I’d be happy to help.
– Bob
Quintessence Worth £Billions
Quintessence Worth £Billions
Let’s do a little back-of-a-fag-packet math re: Quintessence.
There’s somewhere around 26 million software developers worldwide.
A typical software developer, including on-costs, runs out at about £30,000 per annum (UK more like £90K, BRIC countries maybe £10k).
So that’s a world-wide spend of some (26m * 30k) = £780 billion (thousand million), per annum.
Given an uplift in productivity of 5-8 times for Quintessential development approaches, that’s an annual, recurring cost reduction (saving) of £624 billion to £682.5 billion.
You may find claimed productivity increases of this magnitude (5-8 times) somewhat unbelievable (despite the evidence). So let’s be conservative and propose a modest doubling of productivity. That would mean an annual, recurring cost reduction (saving) of £390 billion. Still not to be sniffed at.
For The Individual Organisation
Let’s consider a single UK-based organisation with 100 developers. Present costs (for the developers alone) will be around £90k * 100 = £9 million annually (more or less, depending on a number of factors). Again, assuming a modest doubling of productivity*, a quintessential approach would garner an annual, recurring cost reduction (saving) of £4.5 million for this example organisation.
What do these figures tell us? That the world and individual organisations both are not at all interested in reducing software development costs (or increasing software development productivity). Or maybe they just don’t believe it’s possible to be any more productive than they are already (it is possible to be much more productive, see e.g. RIghtshifting).
*Or getting twice as much done in a given time, for the same spend. Or halving the time it takes to get something done, for the same spend.
– Bob
Further Reading
Marshall, R.W. (2021). Quintessence: An Acme for Software Development Organisations. Falling Blossoms (LeanPub).
Spilt Milk And Defect Prevention
Spilt Milk And Defect Prevention
“It’s no use crying over spilt milk” they say. Which to me sounds like an acceptance that things will go wrong, and there’s no point trying to prevent such things.
I beg to differ.
The Milky Porridge
Spoon – face up
Let’s take my breakfast as an example. Most days I choose a bowl of hot porridge. I like to add a little cold milk on top of the porridge, to cool it down and add a little creaminess. To keep the milk separate from the porridge I habitually pour the milk onto a spoon. And inevitably, 90% of the time the milk splashes onto the countertop.
After eons spent wiping up the splashed milk every day, finally the penny dropped and I saw this anew – as a simple defect prevention challenge.
Once seen in this light, a simple flip of the spoon, pouring the milk onto the back of the spoon, et voila! No more splashes. No more wiping up.
Spoon – face down
Defect prevented. W5
– Bob
Quintessence For Busy People
Quintessence For Busy People
Ok. So you don’t have time to read a whole book. No matter how productive it might make you and your teams. I get it.
So here’s a Cook’s Tour of Quintessence, in a nutshell.
We are shaped by our thoughts. We become what we think.”
~ The Buddha
Quintessence is a collection of ideas which differ from those in general circulation in the software industry – and in business more generally.
From the Foreword
That is the real challenge to readers of [Quintessence] – to consider these ideas as a wholly different way of working, rather than an à la carte menu of possibilities. If you can do that, you may have what it takes to be a leader in your company’s transformation.
The Ideas
Change is desirable. Seek it out. Embrace it.
Discussion is essential. Dialogue skills can be learned.
Undiscussables (taboo topics) balkanise common understanding.
Courage is necessary to taking risks, and to facing difficult questions.
Everybody has needs. Celebrate folks’ needs and attend to them.
Inevitable, some folks’ needs matter more than others. Make the policy for deciding who matters transparent and discussable.
The collective assumptions beliefs of the organisation define its culture. And its (relative) success.
Success is defined in terms of the organisation’s common (shared) purpose, and its attainment.
Culture is a read-only manifestation of collective assumptions and beliefs. Alignment of culture to organisational objectives and ambitions is the main lever for success.
Fluidity is the essential attribute of organisations structures. Being able to restructure in the light of daily experience and learning.
An organisations policies and structures must change as its collective assumptions and beliefs change.
Talent – the rate at which someone can develop their capabilities – is a function of the system (the way the work works) as much as the individual.
Interpersonal relationships are the key to organisational effectiveness.
Remuneration is a poor motivator. More a hygiene factor than anything else.
Economies of flow trump economies of scale every time.
Waste correlates inversely with effectiveness. Ineffective organisations have high levels of waste.
(Share, common) purpose drives alignment and a sense of community, motivation and morale.
A clearly articulated Case For Action improves clarity and shared understanding, as well as motivation and a sense of community.
A shared vision for the organisation improves understanding and enhances engagement.
A focus on effectiveness trumps a focus on efficiency by a factor of five or more.
“Efficiency” and “effectiveness” are by no means synonymous.
Proficiency in systems thinking allows us to break the chains of the silo mentality.
Managing parts of an organisation in glorious isolation (local optimisation) is the height of folly.
Innovations in the way the work works have a significantly higher payback that product or service innovations.
Understanding the virus of variability makes work more predictable, and thus more controllable.
Learning has happened ONLY when behaviours have changed. And happens mostly via action (normative learning).
Serious Play is much more fun, and much more productive, than “work”.
When the workers own the way the work works, joy is the outcome and productivity is the norm.
Improvement serves meeting folks’ needs better, in aggregate.
Don’t do anything that isn’t play.
Slack is desirable. Busyness is wildly dysfunctional. Utilisation is only relevant at a bottleneck.
Explicit doctrine promotes dialogue and discussion about purpose, who matters, the way the work works, etc.
Quality emerges from a carefully constructed cultural environment.
ZeeDee (Zero Defects) is a cultural and social choice.
When we exclude consideration of some folks’ needs, we risk hugely inflated costs (waste).
Delay has a cost. And can be quantified.
Risk is desirable, when adequately controlled.
Quantification (expressing ideas, needs, etc. in terms of numbers) enhances clarity and communication, and reduces misunderstandings.
The only measure worth a candle are those collected by those who subsequently use them.
Hierarchy has had its day in the sun. We prefer flatness and self-organisation.
Management must reorient to enablement, resourcing and support.
Group accountability trumps individual accountability.
People choosing to take ownership and accountability is much preferable to assigning same.
Prioritising shared goals over personal self-interest leads to fellowship, collaboration and esprit de corps.
Value flows best horizontally across the organisation, not up and down silos.
Longer-term product orientation trumps shorter-term project orientation.
Considering multiple planning horizons contributes significantly to growth.
Speed (a.k.a. velocity) serves folks’ needs only when relevant.
Diversity implies heterogeneity rather than homogeneity.
Reuse demands investment and close attention to ROI.
Software is rarely the best form for solutions to folks’ needs.
Group collaboration benefits from a cadence a.k.a. operational rhythm.
Better decisions arise from those closest to the work.
Evidence serves decision-making best when collected and collated by those doing the work.
Radical transparency serves the bottom line.
Requisite skills are much broader than just technical skills.
Throughput Accounting enables better decision-making
Effective governance relies on the social dimension (relationships between people), not processes.
The topography of the workplace impacts productivity.
Differing belief systems within one organisation cause dissonance, conflict, unproductive dissent and increased risk.
Nonviolence and volunteerism serve organisations better than violence and compulsion.
Software development has much in common with other branches of engineering. Heuristics rule.
Recruiting human beings is the way to go.
Single-piece continuous flow is the acme to aim for.
Identify constraints, focus attention on improving throughput here.
Treating people like adults promotes a passel of good things.
Morale matters.
Motivation means discretionary effort, and increased joy for all.
Situations are always inherently simple. The trick is to discover that simplicity.
Egalitarian cultures enable people to collaborate more effectively, to the benefit of the organisation’s overall effectiveness.
Productive conflict is the equivalent of a strenuous workout for a team – it builds strength and resilience, and leads to success.
– Bob
Further Reading
Marshall, R.W. (2021). Quintessence: An Acme for Software Development Organisations. Falling Blossoms (LeanPub).
Quickie: The Greatest Tragedy
The greatest tragedy is a hopeless unwillingness of [developers] to better their lot.
~ Gandhi, Harijan, January 9, 1937 (Paraphrased)
Quickie: Solutions Exist
Whatever problems you have, the solutions already exist. Finding them may be a challenge. And you probably won’t like them when you do.
Quickie: Knowing Everything
You may think you know everything, but you don’t. You may think I know everything (bless you) but I don’t.
Nobody is smarter than everybody.
Quickie: Did You Read…?
Did you read “Quintessence” yet? Are you missing out on the exciting new field of Organisational Psychotherapy and its application in building the superior organisation?
How about “Hearts over Diamonds“? The foundational book for Organisational Psychotherapy. Read about this awesome new approach to changing organisational culture and achieving better alignment with your business aspirations and goals. Compare your existing organisation against the world’s best.
And then there’s “Memeology“. An innovative, breakthrough approach to Organisational Psychotherapy for organisations willing to help themselves, with a staggering 70+ memes listed and structured for productive discussions.
Buy each book now on Leanpub!
Or buy the bundle of all three books together at a discounted price.
Enjoy! Tell your friends!
ICYMI: One Of My Most Popular Posts – Six FAQs
In case you missed it, here’s one of the most popular posts on my Think Different blog: Six FAQs.
Why Is No One Interested In Superior Software Development Approaches?
Why Is No One Interested In Superior Software Development Approaches?
I’ve been monitoring companies’ interest in software development for enough years (25+) to state unequivocally:
No one running or working in companies seems at all interested in superior* approaches to building and delivering software solutions.
Why might this be so? I propose at least five possibilities:
- Complacency / ignorance
Maybe those responsible don’t see themselves as actually responsible, or maybe they have little knowledge of the state of the art and what’s possible. - Too difficult
Maybe selecting and applying elements of state of the art approaches seem too difficult, arcane or risky. Or too complex, all in all. - Not connected to the personal wellbeing of those quasi-responsible for taking relevant decisions and actions.
(See also my popular post: “Your REAL Job“). - Agile is The Last One
It’s seen as the final evolution or end-state of all software development approaches. No need to look beyond. No more progress is required. - Progress cannot happen in companies as they are run today
Superior approaches demand organisations are run in ways anathematical to current management mores.
Do you have any other possibilities I have not listed here? Which do you favour as an explanation?
Your contribution will be welcomed.
– Bob
* By superior I mean approaches which cut costs, improve quality, reduce timescales, increase certainty and predictability, lower stress, and otherwise improve effectiveness. Take a look at Quintessence (the book) if you’d like to understand more and dive deeper into what’s possible.
Quickie: Inconvenient Truth About Change
“Organisational change or transformation requires one to change oneself, first and foremost” is a truly inconvenient truth.
The more senior the person, the more inconvenient (and unpalatable) it is.
Quickie: Software Development Managers
How many “software development managers” and the like are:
- Accomplished managers
- Also-ran managers
- Software development experts
?
Quickie: Why Not Quintessential?
Why suffer all the pain of working to “become Agile”, for so little gain? Why not suffer less pain and find more gain in working towards the Quintessential?
Think Different