2 ms·

Unfortunately it does. It's comparatively quick and easy to slap together an application which does the first 80%. Then, come edge cases, stuff your req enginee

by soco 5y ago

Unfortunately it does. It's comparatively quick and easy to slap together an application which does the first 80%. Then, come edge cases, stuff your req engineers didn't come around to define, or which your approach moved fast and broke, or which simply couldn't fit in the architecture as your initial sprints created. Everything doable of course but...

giantg2 5y ago
So you're thinking on a project level. I'm talking about a resource level. Why hire a couple senior devs to spend 90% of their time on junior tasks? A better model is to hire a couple juniors to handle the junior tasks and use the seniors for the senior tasks and oversight. Much more efficient that way. Sure, you can have percentages over 100% for many things. When looking at a breakdown of tasks/time/work for an individual, you are constrained to 100% (the pie chart values might get bigger but it always adds up to 100%)
- PaulHoule 5y ago
  Pro Tip: calling developers "resources" causes employee turnover. What is a "senior" task and what is a "junior" task depends on the organization of labor. It's certainly possible for a senior to divide a big task into small chunks that juniors can dispatch with great haste. You could possibly put 1 senior and 4 juniors together in a bullpen and get them to do the work that (say) 3 seniors or 10 juniors could do with a different organization. To realize that you have to get the human relationships right, a theme I keep harping on is that the people involve have to feel the tasks are worthy of them. Many juniors, in a situation like that, might feel like they are being micromanaged. Another thing you need is for the senior to have enough of a global view of the situation that their seniority really produces value. If you really don't understand where you are going and you'll need to rework everything you aren't getting value out of that kind of situation. Around my farm we have a large number of "junior resources" available for construction work. Those young people make silly mistakes that cost time and money and that's one reason why they make $18 an hour compared to a more experienced person who makes $40 an hour because they are twice as productive.

by soco 5y ago

giantg2 5y ago

So you're thinking on a project level. I'm talking about a resource level. Why hire a couple senior devs to spend 90% of their time on junior tasks? A better model is to hire a couple juniors to handle the junior tasks and use the seniors for the senior tasks and oversight. Much more efficient that way. Sure, you can have percentages over 100% for many things. When looking at a breakdown of tasks/time/work for an individual, you are constrained to 100% (the pie chart values might get bigger but it always adds up to 100%)

PaulHoule 5y ago
Pro Tip: calling developers "resources" causes employee turnover. What is a "senior" task and what is a "junior" task depends on the organization of labor. It's certainly possible for a senior to divide a big task into small chunks that juniors can dispatch with great haste. You could possibly put 1 senior and 4 juniors together in a bullpen and get them to do the work that (say) 3 seniors or 10 juniors could do with a different organization. To realize that you have to get the human relationships right, a theme I keep harping on is that the people involve have to feel the tasks are worthy of them. Many juniors, in a situation like that, might feel like they are being micromanaged. Another thing you need is for the senior to have enough of a global view of the situation that their seniority really produces value. If you really don't understand where you are going and you'll need to rework everything you aren't getting value out of that kind of situation. Around my farm we have a large number of "junior resources" available for construction work. Those young people make silly mistakes that cost time and money and that's one reason why they make $18 an hour compared to a more experienced person who makes $40 an hour because they are twice as productive.