4 ms·
Yes. But isn't this just a corollary of a (small) group being more than the sum of its parts? IE, A group of 4 should be more than 4/3 productive than a group
by ajb 18y ago
Yes. But isn't this just a corollary of a (small) group being more than the sum of its parts? IE, A group of 4 should be more than 4/3 productive than a group of 3. The right comparison is to compare a group of 4 with one bad apple with the productivity of a group of 3.
- fhars 18y agoYeah, the truth is somewhere between that and the other theory that the overhead for internal communication goes at least quadratic with the number of group members, so a group of four looses 16/9 more of their productivity to internal friction than a group of three. And all this is assuming you actually have a quantitative measure of programmer productivity that is accurate enough to measure a 30% change. But let's no go down that drain again.
- anamax 18y ago> A group of 4 should be more than 4/3 productive than a group of 3. Why? Amdahl's law suggests otherwise, as does any non-zero cost of communications.
- ajb 18y agoBecause the knowledge and skill set of the group is larger. However, yes, at some point this is outweighed by the costs.