5 ms·
> Good software teams build quality into projects by introducing continuous integration, unit testing, creating feedback, and tightening these feedback loops.
by bb88 3y ago
> Good software teams build quality into projects by introducing continuous integration, unit testing, creating feedback, and tightening these feedback loops.
No. Good software teams are led by competent, technical management. Managers who aren't afraid to get down into the dirty details. Managers who aren't afraid to roll up their sleeves and write code if they need to.
The process doesn't matter. The management of what is or is not important does. Agile is just one process out of many.
Imagine an accounting team led by someone who never did accounting in their life: "Just make the numbers work out! I don't care how you do it! My bonus is at stake!"
- johnnyworker 3y agoBut that doesn't contradict the parent, does it? I'd say you both make good points.
- bb88 3y agoWell... here's a thought experiment. Let's say you have a bunch of school children and architects create a skyscraper. I've given both groups the process to design a skyscraper. So in both cases, I should end up with a safe building?
- johnnyworker 3y agoWhy not both? Am I missing something? You can have feedback loops and CI and all that, "good craftsmanship" or "good practices" (not "best" practices because those often suck hah), where of course opinions vary on the details of that -- and then someone who is also good at the craft who spends more or most time on helping the rest work together, i.e. manage/lead them.
- withinboredom 3y agoI’d bet the children would come out better simply because they have parents who are likely multi-disciplined as a group. A disparite group will (almost) always come up with better results than a homogeneous one (at least in my experience)
- madhadron 3y ago> Good software teams are led by competent, technical management. ...or perhaps with no managers at all. I'm less and less convinced of the importance of management in engineering except to give investors an illusion of control.
- mangodrunk 3y agoI sort of agree, and I do think it’s possible depending on the team. But unfortunately developers can be too opinionated and get focused on low priority things.
- MattPalmer1086 3y agoSigh... This myth that the only people who can competently manage developers are other developers has been floating round for decades. For some reason, developers seem remarkably blind to the skills other roles and disciplines require. Only a developer can do that, everyone else is basically useless fluff. Maybe it's a form of arrogance or just deep unself-awareness.
- pi-e-sigma 3y agoLet's apply your reasoning to medicine. I'm sure you would be completely fine with managers telling your surgeon what parts of the surgery can be 'optimized away'.
- MattPalmer1086 3y agoHaha, funny strawman. My reasoning is that non developers are capable of managing developers, notably people who have good management skills. Your contention is that the surgeon should be running the hospital.
- pi-e-sigma 3y agoHahah, indeed. So have you seen a law department in a company headed by someone who doesn't come from law background? How about a finance department headed by some schmuck who doesn't know anything about finance?
- MattPalmer1086 3y agoI've seen plenty of departments managed by people who don't come from the background of the department. My current boss is extremely good and came from a different discipline. Although I don't deny it can help to have the background, it is not necessary to be a good manager of something. Also seen plenty of good techies promoted to management and failing badly.
- 3y ago