7 ms·
Because everything is urgent, all of the time.. and so nothing gets improved.
by absrnd 10y ago
Because everything is urgent, all of the time.. and so nothing gets improved.
- aiiane 10y agoThis is what escalation is for - the job of a VP or Director of Engineering is to decide what is actually urgent and approve fast-tracking it, and what should actually follow process. Having an efficient escalation process is critical.
- dsr_ 10y agoVery much this: there should be a process for "emergency change" and that process has to be used for every actual emergency and not for anything else.
- droopyEyelids 10y agoThe word "should"
- chewyfruitloop 10y agoI've found that those in charge also have a budget to run you on... how do they justify you spending x hours updating code to do exactly 0 as far as anyone is concerned? ..plus all the regression testing? They just don't... it gets left as it is
- ErnestedCode 10y ago"I know this is priority 1, but is it priority 1A, 1B, or 1C?"
- quicklyfrozen 10y agoAnd let me guess... everything priority 2 or lower means 'never' :-)
- NegativeLatency 10y agoOr priority zero.
- ryandrake 10y agoEvery numeric priority scoring system I've ever worked with at every company I've ever worked with has devolved into this: Start with P1 (high), P2 (medium), and P3 (low). Sooner or later, an exec will swoop in and declare something Even Higher Priority Than P1!!! So, "P0" gets invented, and after some time, you have tons of P0 issues, meaning P1 is the new "medium", P2 is the new "low" and P3 becomes "never". Then something comes in that is Even Higher Priority than P0!!! And now, you're stuck. For this reason, I always advocate reversing the numbers. The higher the P number, the higher the priority. So you never run out of numbers to express how much more urgent and earth shattering your next bug is. Try it!
- zachrose 10y agoI just got a sudden bitter taste in my mouth when reading "P0" and remembering the people who used to say it out loud; is that normal? Another great thing about inverting the priority numbers is that nothing can easily go beneath a floor of 0, though ultimately all of this is about fixing the symptom and not the cause.
- flukus 10y agoThis is what I like about kanban, there is a queue, priority is not a status.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- azernik 10y agoThis is inevitably what happens when the people reporting the issues get to decide their priority (I've seen this even in a two-person dynamic). You have to have discipline, and you usually have to have an impartial outsider (to the issue at hand) who doesn't care about other people's panic to actually set priority levels.
- aiiane 10y agoI've seen systems that have two fields, e.g. priority and severity. Where severity is "how important the client thinks it is" and priority is "how important we think it is".
- user5994461 10y agoUPDATE jira SET priority=nil WHERE 1=1; Here's your bugfix.
- user5994461 10y agoNah. Nothing is ever urgent. Just take all tickets that are "urgent", remove the urgent and put them at the back of the queue.
- kozak 10y agoThe best solution against "priority inflation" that I ever saw: support request form of the DreamHost web hosting provider had priority levels with vivid descriptions (examples) of their meaning, to the extent that the top priority level was called "people are dying". I doubt anyone dared to select that priority unless people were indeed dying.
- collyw 10y agoStory of my last few jobs.