3 ms·

Seems like bigger risk is people not following methodologies properly in the first place. At least that’s my experience

by ll918 8y ago

GuB-42 8y ago
Mine too. It can take the form of useless meetings. ex: Oh, stand up meetings sound good, but what are we going to talk about? Only keeping the cheap aspects. Ex: not doing formal test campaigns based on previously defined requirements but forgetting about things like pair programming in XP, up to date automated unit tests, etc...
- chaosite 8y ago
  That problem is called cargo-culting. You copy the outwards appearances, not understanding the underlying motives, yet expect the same results.
Pica_soO 8y ago
That sounds very much, like a no-true-socialism fallacy played via the bank of the table. If your ideology/methodology cant be implemented with the people you got, maybe its badly designed?
galangalalgol 8y ago
When enough people misuse a methodology it is a comment against the methodology. Trying to use process to replace accountability usually fails.
- Nasrudith 8y ago
  I don't see how that follows neccessary - the majority of people aren't able to perform calculus but that doesn't mean there is something wrong with it. Granted it is a matter of where it is expected to be applied and by who. Expecting an artillery gunner to do advanced math calculations from the back lines is fine if not ideal compared to computerization. Expecting a grunt under fire to do so to use his rifle is not no mattet how accurate it would wind up.
Nasrudith 8y ago
Of course part of knowing the rules is when not to follow them ironically. You don't use rior shield walls against cannon or machinegun fire or try to take cover against angry mobs. It is a principle of art as well at very least of when to break the rules - it should be done for a reason and awareness of how it may backfire instead of "just because".

3 ms·

Seems like bigger risk is people not following methodologies properly in the first place. At least that’s my experience

by ll918 8y ago

Seems like bigger risk is people not following methodologies properly in the first place. At least that’s my experience

GuB-42 8y ago
Mine too. It can take the form of useless meetings. ex: Oh, stand up meetings sound good, but what are we going to talk about? Only keeping the cheap aspects. Ex: not doing formal test campaigns based on previously defined requirements but forgetting about things like pair programming in XP, up to date automated unit tests, etc...
- chaosite 8y ago
  That problem is called cargo-culting. You copy the outwards appearances, not understanding the underlying motives, yet expect the same results.
Pica_soO 8y ago
That sounds very much, like a no-true-socialism fallacy played via the bank of the table. If your ideology/methodology cant be implemented with the people you got, maybe its badly designed?
galangalalgol 8y ago
When enough people misuse a methodology it is a comment against the methodology. Trying to use process to replace accountability usually fails.
- Nasrudith 8y ago
  I don't see how that follows neccessary - the majority of people aren't able to perform calculus but that doesn't mean there is something wrong with it. Granted it is a matter of where it is expected to be applied and by who. Expecting an artillery gunner to do advanced math calculations from the back lines is fine if not ideal compared to computerization. Expecting a grunt under fire to do so to use his rifle is not no mattet how accurate it would wind up.
Nasrudith 8y ago
Of course part of knowing the rules is when not to follow them ironically. You don't use rior shield walls against cannon or machinegun fire or try to take cover against angry mobs. It is a principle of art as well at very least of when to break the rules - it should be done for a reason and awareness of how it may backfire instead of "just because".