3 ms·

For a programmer team, I like to look at the ratio: people writing code/people not writing code The smaller the ratio, the less productive the team.

hammock 11y ago
All other things being equal. With the right leadership it's feasible that adding a manager to a team of two programmers could increase overall productivity (rather than decrease it 33%).
- ktRolster 11y ago
  Maybe, but you'll do better with 3 programmers, assuming they can manage themselves reasonably well.
  - hammock 11y ago
    Yes, I suppose adding 1 programmer to a team of 2 would be the same as adding a manager who increases each programmer's productivity by 50%. Likewise for a team of 10 programmers, you can either add another programmer or a manager who increases existing productivity by 10%.
    - ktRolster 11y ago
      If you know a manager who can increase two programmer's productivity by 50%, I'd like to hear how he does it. It seems unlikely (assuming the programmers aren't doing something stupid, like spending all their time on Facebook).
developer2 11y ago
Tell me about it. Our team has 3 frontend developers and 5 backend developers. We also have 3 product owners, a scrum master, a heavily involved scrum master's manager, team manager, team manager's manager, team manager's manager's manager, then the CTO and higher. Ignoring CTO and higher who aren't directly involved in day-to-day operations, we have 8 management level positions managing 8 developers. Every sprint is a clusterfuck of confusion wherein those 8 managers can't agree on what should be worked on. It's absolutely stunning that 8 people cannot organize work for another 8 people.
- ktRolster 11y ago
  When I hear "scrum master who isn't also programming" a red warning flag goes up. My favorite way is to take turns being scrum master, cycling through and switching on each sprint. That way everyone gets experience and understands better how the company operates.
  - developer2 11y ago
    I'm not opposed to a dedicated scrum master, but the issue I have is that I have yet to meet one who ever defends the developers' right to have the agile/scrum process respected. Really, they just wind up being another manager that happens to spend a lot of time in Jira. I've butt heads a lot with scrum people who bend over and say "yes" to every single (unreasonable) demand thrown at them from the business side. :'(
    - ktRolster 11y ago
      > I'm not opposed to a dedicated scrum master ok, here's something I've been wondering. Assuming your team is in the 8-12 programmer range (which is typical for an agile team), what does the scrum master do with all his time? How is there enough for him to do to fill up a full time job?
      - developer2 11y ago
        I would hope much of their time would be spent really organizing and understanding the scope of each project/task. In my experience, most tasks still get dropped into a sprint without anyone really understanding the full scope. I can easily see 40 hour weeks being spent making sure that everyone is signing off on well-defined tasks. Anything to help reduce the surprise factor is a win in my book.

hammock 11y ago

All other things being equal. With the right leadership it's feasible that adding a manager to a team of two programmers could increase overall productivity (rather than decrease it 33%).

ktRolster 11y ago
Maybe, but you'll do better with 3 programmers, assuming they can manage themselves reasonably well.
- hammock 11y ago
  Yes, I suppose adding 1 programmer to a team of 2 would be the same as adding a manager who increases each programmer's productivity by 50%. Likewise for a team of 10 programmers, you can either add another programmer or a manager who increases existing productivity by 10%.
  - ktRolster 11y ago
    If you know a manager who can increase two programmer's productivity by 50%, I'd like to hear how he does it. It seems unlikely (assuming the programmers aren't doing something stupid, like spending all their time on Facebook).

developer2 11y ago

Tell me about it. Our team has 3 frontend developers and 5 backend developers. We also have 3 product owners, a scrum master, a heavily involved scrum master's manager, team manager, team manager's manager, team manager's manager's manager, then the CTO and higher. Ignoring CTO and higher who aren't directly involved in day-to-day operations, we have 8 management level positions managing 8 developers. Every sprint is a clusterfuck of confusion wherein those 8 managers can't agree on what should be worked on. It's absolutely stunning that 8 people cannot organize work for another 8 people.

ktRolster 11y ago
When I hear "scrum master who isn't also programming" a red warning flag goes up. My favorite way is to take turns being scrum master, cycling through and switching on each sprint. That way everyone gets experience and understands better how the company operates.
- developer2 11y ago
  I'm not opposed to a dedicated scrum master, but the issue I have is that I have yet to meet one who ever defends the developers' right to have the agile/scrum process respected. Really, they just wind up being another manager that happens to spend a lot of time in Jira. I've butt heads a lot with scrum people who bend over and say "yes" to every single (unreasonable) demand thrown at them from the business side. :'(
  - ktRolster 11y ago
    > I'm not opposed to a dedicated scrum master ok, here's something I've been wondering. Assuming your team is in the 8-12 programmer range (which is typical for an agile team), what does the scrum master do with all his time? How is there enough for him to do to fill up a full time job?
    - developer2 11y ago
      I would hope much of their time would be spent really organizing and understanding the scope of each project/task. In my experience, most tasks still get dropped into a sprint without anyone really understanding the full scope. I can easily see 40 hour weeks being spent making sure that everyone is signing off on well-defined tasks. Anything to help reduce the surprise factor is a win in my book.