3 ms·
Probably because there is always a bigger picture: culture, process (e.g. testing, code review, time pressure, feature centric performance metrics). Surely, th
by ithkuil 7y ago
Probably because there is always a bigger picture: culture, process (e.g. testing, code review, time pressure, feature centric performance metrics).
Surely, the person making the mistake is the proximal cause for a given bug, and surely all other things being equal personal attitude matters (i.e. a more careless person is going to make more mistakes), but if you zoom out to the big picture you see other responsibilities and more importantly you see opportunities for improvement that vastly exceed the playoffs of "just putting more care" into each commit.
- Angostura 7y agoUnderstood. Thanks for the explanation. I have to say I don’t intuitively like the position, because taken broadly you could conclude that no-one in an organisation is ever personally responsible for their actions, because some system should have prevented the mistake. This feels wrong
- ithkuil 7y agoIndeed, it does feel wrong because it is, technically, wrong. The intent of a "no blame culture" however is to find a new sweet spot on the myriad of tradeoffs an engineering organization does, as an many paradigm shifts we do, it is accompanying with a certain amount of bullshit-sounding maxims meant to be thought provoking and dislodge the readers from their suboptimal local maximums.