4 ms·

"If you have a dev team with no incentive for completion, you have a dev team problem." Devs naturally lack incentive - it's an existential nature of software,

"If you have a dev team with no incentive for completion, you have a dev team problem." Devs naturally lack incentive - it's an existential nature of software, i.e. it can go on forever. It's not like building a house. "If you have a hold up to deliver perfection instead of what the business needs, you have a scope creep problem" A 'Quality' issue problem, not so much scope, but again - there's a natural dissonance between Engineering instinct, and outcomes. Engineers naturally want to build something robust, clean, and performant. It always makes sense to them, pushing against that is always hard. Ergo - the need for clear milestones - with timings.

brightball 8y ago
It’s still a scope creep problem. The deliverable is the milestone. There is a big difference between infinite knob-tuning and solving the problem in a manner that meets needs. It’s very much a scope creep problem.
barberousse 8y ago
>Devs naturally lack incentive - it's an existential nature of software, i.e. it can go on forever. It's not like building a house. But we're talking about adult humans who have agreed to a contract to fulfill business needs in exchange for money, I tend to presume that its on the developer to guarantee their end of the contract, otherwise business won't fulfull there's and I further presume business gets to decide what the criteria are. If things are otherwise, which this seems to be suggesting, then that would be an egregious business error, keeping on developers that aren't delivering anything, and if your tech lead isn't giving you honest assessments you let them go too. This looks the business problem is being coupled into the warrant behind sprints being key cause devs "naturally lack incentive". I also don't know how to agree with developers "naturally" lacking incentive, given they could lose their job, but I've definitely met developers with little motivation. That level of motivation tends to be tied to wider organizational issues as well...
- sonnyblarney 8y ago
  "who have agreed to a contract to fulfill business needs in exchange for money, " Technically, that's true, but in reality not. Devs go to work, build stuff, and get paid every few weeks. Their direction really is oriented only towards the goals they are given. Business needs are often counterintuitive to the natural position of a developer. The reason I believe this, is because I'm a developer who moved into the business world. I see this utterly and fundamentally different now. Even how I approach writing code is different. Business needs are very difficult to understand for anyone who has not sat in a true business role: customer facing, selling i.e. direct sales etc.. A few people have a 'natural born' business instinct, but it's rare. Even people in regular marketing jobs (i.e. not marketing ops, like branding, creative) I find don't have an instinct for it. I like specific goals, that are attached to timings. They're not always going to be made, but both of those things are important. Developers moving in the wrong direction is more common in software than not.

brightball 8y ago

It’s still a scope creep problem. The deliverable is the milestone. There is a big difference between infinite knob-tuning and solving the problem in a manner that meets needs. It’s very much a scope creep problem.

barberousse 8y ago

>Devs naturally lack incentive - it's an existential nature of software, i.e. it can go on forever. It's not like building a house. But we're talking about adult humans who have agreed to a contract to fulfill business needs in exchange for money, I tend to presume that its on the developer to guarantee their end of the contract, otherwise business won't fulfull there's and I further presume business gets to decide what the criteria are. If things are otherwise, which this seems to be suggesting, then that would be an egregious business error, keeping on developers that aren't delivering anything, and if your tech lead isn't giving you honest assessments you let them go too. This looks the business problem is being coupled into the warrant behind sprints being key cause devs "naturally lack incentive". I also don't know how to agree with developers "naturally" lacking incentive, given they could lose their job, but I've definitely met developers with little motivation. That level of motivation tends to be tied to wider organizational issues as well...

sonnyblarney 8y ago
"who have agreed to a contract to fulfill business needs in exchange for money, " Technically, that's true, but in reality not. Devs go to work, build stuff, and get paid every few weeks. Their direction really is oriented only towards the goals they are given. Business needs are often counterintuitive to the natural position of a developer. The reason I believe this, is because I'm a developer who moved into the business world. I see this utterly and fundamentally different now. Even how I approach writing code is different. Business needs are very difficult to understand for anyone who has not sat in a true business role: customer facing, selling i.e. direct sales etc.. A few people have a 'natural born' business instinct, but it's rare. Even people in regular marketing jobs (i.e. not marketing ops, like branding, creative) I find don't have an instinct for it. I like specific goals, that are attached to timings. They're not always going to be made, but both of those things are important. Developers moving in the wrong direction is more common in software than not.