7 ms·

> but I have to iterate on features holistically and sometimes speculatively. YES. THANK YOU! I've been trying to tell people this for ages. Maybe other people

> but I have to iterate on features holistically and sometimes speculatively. YES. THANK YOU! I've been trying to tell people this for ages. Maybe other people are somehow capable of perfectly predicting every conceivable edge-case and consequence without even starting to work on something, but I can't. I have to start building something in order to see it clearly. And this ENRAGES certain kinds of managers, I have found.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
anon9001 6y ago
Managers just want you to deliver on a predictable schedule. Here's how you can solve your problem: Make as many tickets as you can think of, it doesn't really matter if they contain the essence of the problem or not, it just matters that there are many tickets associated with the task. Once you have your tickets, estimate them with as much padding as possible. If the manager complains that you're padding a ticket too much, make two tickets and split the estimate. Once you have a big pile of tickets and estimates, you've bought yourself enough time to do the work. Go do the work, then mark all the tickets as complete. You'll figure out the edge cases as you go, as long as you've made enough tickets and time to do the job at a reasonable pace. If you have extra time left over, get started on the next thing, improve your tooling, or try to help someone else with their tasks. If you don't have extra time left over, make more tickets next time.
- james-mcelwain 6y ago
  This is also what I do, but it seems so antagonistic and deceptive. I want my relationship with my PM to be productive and collaborative.
- gilbetron 6y ago
  Managers want a fiction to present to their superiors - the most happy my managers are is when what you describe happens. I like your approach :) I might have to be more explicit in creating a fiction. The only issue is if/when you actually run into things that significantly delay things right towards the end.
- alistairSH 6y ago
  Ack, please don't. As a manager, I'm pretty sure I'd see this as the bullshit it is and call you on it. We're not all morons.
  - anon9001 6y ago
    Where exactly is the problem with my strategy? I'm also a manager of a small team. My main goals are to make sure everyone is not idle, not burned out, and not missing deadlines. My boss's goal is to try and get everyone to work every waking hour so we can deliver faster. My job is primarily to keep the peace between the executives and the workers. When I fail the workers, it looks like unpaid overtime. When I fail the executives, it looks like undelivered features. I think the actual purpose of agile, from a developer's perspective, is to create more time to deliver quality engineering work product. From an executive's perspective, agile exists to squeeze developers into completing tickets faster. As a manager, it's my job to keep both parties as satisfied as possible. If engineers have enough time to build and executives get enough deliverables, then the company succeeds. What's your strategy?
    - alistairSH 6y ago
      I read your comment as "create as many tickets as necessary to throw off management's understanding of the effort and complexity of the problem." Creating more tasks than necessary sounds like a waste of everybody's time. As I noted in a parallel comment, on my team, developers are never creating tasks on their own or in a vacuum. It's done as a team effort during planning meetings. Perhaps I should add that my boss (senior director) has never asked me about my board, velocity, or anything like that. Discussion is higher level - "is project X on schedule?" or "are you going to miss anything on your roadmap?" not "why is task X or story Y not done yet?" If your director is asking that, he has too much time on his hands.
      - watwut 6y ago
        Through, project managers lie about the being on roadmap. The answer to higher management is always "we are on time" to look good. Asking specifics from higher ups is just smart.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

anon9001 6y ago

Managers just want you to deliver on a predictable schedule. Here's how you can solve your problem: Make as many tickets as you can think of, it doesn't really matter if they contain the essence of the problem or not, it just matters that there are many tickets associated with the task. Once you have your tickets, estimate them with as much padding as possible. If the manager complains that you're padding a ticket too much, make two tickets and split the estimate. Once you have a big pile of tickets and estimates, you've bought yourself enough time to do the work. Go do the work, then mark all the tickets as complete. You'll figure out the edge cases as you go, as long as you've made enough tickets and time to do the job at a reasonable pace. If you have extra time left over, get started on the next thing, improve your tooling, or try to help someone else with their tasks. If you don't have extra time left over, make more tickets next time.

james-mcelwain 6y ago
This is also what I do, but it seems so antagonistic and deceptive. I want my relationship with my PM to be productive and collaborative.
gilbetron 6y ago
Managers want a fiction to present to their superiors - the most happy my managers are is when what you describe happens. I like your approach :) I might have to be more explicit in creating a fiction. The only issue is if/when you actually run into things that significantly delay things right towards the end.
alistairSH 6y ago
Ack, please don't. As a manager, I'm pretty sure I'd see this as the bullshit it is and call you on it. We're not all morons.
- anon9001 6y ago
  Where exactly is the problem with my strategy? I'm also a manager of a small team. My main goals are to make sure everyone is not idle, not burned out, and not missing deadlines. My boss's goal is to try and get everyone to work every waking hour so we can deliver faster. My job is primarily to keep the peace between the executives and the workers. When I fail the workers, it looks like unpaid overtime. When I fail the executives, it looks like undelivered features. I think the actual purpose of agile, from a developer's perspective, is to create more time to deliver quality engineering work product. From an executive's perspective, agile exists to squeeze developers into completing tickets faster. As a manager, it's my job to keep both parties as satisfied as possible. If engineers have enough time to build and executives get enough deliverables, then the company succeeds. What's your strategy?
  - alistairSH 6y ago
    I read your comment as "create as many tickets as necessary to throw off management's understanding of the effort and complexity of the problem." Creating more tasks than necessary sounds like a waste of everybody's time. As I noted in a parallel comment, on my team, developers are never creating tasks on their own or in a vacuum. It's done as a team effort during planning meetings. Perhaps I should add that my boss (senior director) has never asked me about my board, velocity, or anything like that. Discussion is higher level - "is project X on schedule?" or "are you going to miss anything on your roadmap?" not "why is task X or story Y not done yet?" If your director is asking that, he has too much time on his hands.
    - watwut 6y ago
      Through, project managers lie about the being on roadmap. The answer to higher management is always "we are on time" to look good. Asking specifics from higher ups is just smart.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]