Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [XP] Re: Mary Poppendieck Jan 29 at Agile-Carolinas

Expand Messages
  • simon@tcbventures.com
    ... Actually, here I think you do have a subtle point. A great deal is made of Toyota s success.. much of it I m sure is well deserved... but, the Japanese
    Message 1 of 6 , Jan 31, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      on 31/1/08 2:32 PM, extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com wrote:

      > On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 09:32:01 -0500, you wrote:
      >
      > Ron,
      >
      > As Kent said at the keynote for XP2001(or 2) you have to distrust
      > advice given by the over 40s.
      >
      >>Mary was asked for her programming experience. She gave it. You
      >>ranked her advice as to be "doubted", not even "considered".
      > To be clear, my intention was not to be disrespectful, particularly
      > not to Mary. I do apologise if I caused offence.
      >
      > Doubt is healthy, especially when following Advice is going to be
      > linked to a great deal of effort. It also depends what you have to
      > believe.
      >
      >>That seems to me to be less than respectful to say, even if it
      >>happens to be what you're going to do.
      > That's why I'm reading the book, asking questions, trying to
      > understand, right?
      >
      >>And in the case of Mary Poppendieck, my advice would be that people
      >>should "consider carefully", not "doubt".
      > Perhaps we can agree on slightly different words.
      >
      > In the case of Lean, the fact is that manufacturing has all but
      > disappeared, and what survives is often heavily subsidised.
      > For all the words and theory you have to ask which lesson you are
      > learning.

      Actually, here I think you do have a subtle point. A great deal is made of
      Toyota's success.. much of it I'm sure is well deserved... but, the Japanese
      economic miracle and model for production is not quite what it seems. It now
      very clear that the balance book simply doesn't add up. I'm sure many Japanese
      companies have benefited from what has, for a large number of years, been a
      grossly mis-managed economy subject to few of the contraints we might expect in
      the UK or America. Money has been readily available at the most ridiculously low
      (often non existent) interest rates... with that kind of free-money-funnel its
      hard not to succeed.

      The way companies seek and acquire funding and the largely comical nature of the
      Japanese stock market means its perhaps possible for companies like Toyota to
      succeed where others may have gone to the wall years ago...

      But enough politics.... its boring :)
      >
      > Michael
      >
      >
      >
    • Michael KENNY
      On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 14:28:22 +0000, you wrote: To clarify, for me programmers have more skills than just programming, so I don t quite understand many of your
      Message 2 of 6 , Jan 31, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 14:28:22 +0000, you wrote:

        To clarify, for me programmers have more skills than just programming,
        so I don't quite understand many of your points which appear to be
        based on single-skill individuals.

        >Oh that is one of my pet hates.. inverted programmer snobbery :)
        Can't stand it either!

        >>> Advice from people who have never programmed - ignore
        Maybe ignore was a bit harsh, let's say "heavily doubt",

        >As if everything that goes to make a successful software delivery is all about
        >programming. Programming is one of many disciplines that brings about a
        >successful product
        Programmers don't just produce code. But you do need the code.

        >.. and.. increasingly its a shrinking element of the overall
        >picture. It takes so much more than just programming to get something right
        >these days.. try counting the number of people involved in any software product
        >development then come up with the percentage who are programmers... nice simple
        >metric.
        Really? In the past the customer never met the programmer for all the
        analysts and managers in-between.
        I'd hope now the customer meets the programmer. Who are all the other
        people?

        >... have you any idea how difficult the Customer role is? I think everyone would
        >agree that poor customer involvement and/or skills is a major factor in project
        >failure.. regardless of whether you have good programmers or not.
        Yes, but that's not new to XP. What's new is the programmer meeting
        the customer.

        >Programming has its own disctinct facets but it is not so far removed from other
        >skills that only programmers can comment.
        For me that's exactly the problem. Anyone can comment. Anyone can say
        "Agile in a day". This is why I'm having to filter Advice!
        I prefer the Advice of people in the thick-of-it rather than those on
        the sidelines no matter what book they are clutching. It's something
        like my desire to meet the customer, I want real information.

        >>> Advice from people who no longer program - doubt
        >What? Have they lost their minds? Have they forgotten everything they knew? Have
        >they gained no additional insight from moving from their compilers and casting
        >their net wider?
        See my other reply from today in this thread about "doubt" not being
        meant so badly and also the over 40s!

        >Pardon me, but I haven't heard anything faintly new in the world of programming
        >for years!
        >There has however been lots of progress in organisation, team
        >structure, social dynamics, improved practices (XP) etc etc
        Well there has certainly been change, but progress?
        Did any of it help? How much? Was the introduction more expensive than
        the benefit?

        Michael
      • Simon Jones
        ... ... something right ... software product ... programmers... nice simple ... the ... other ... Ok, if you re a relatively small software house
        Message 3 of 6 , Feb 1, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com, Michael KENNY
          <michael.kenny@...> wrote:
          >
          > On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 14:28:22 +0000, you wrote:
          >
          <snip />

          > >.. and.. increasingly its a shrinking element of the overall
          > >picture. It takes so much more than just programming to get
          something right
          > >these days.. try counting the number of people involved in any
          software product
          > >development then come up with the percentage who are
          programmers... nice simple
          > >metric.
          > Really? In the past the customer never met the programmer for all
          the
          > analysts and managers in-between.
          > I'd hope now the customer meets the programmer. Who are all the
          other
          > people?

          Ok, if you're a relatively small software house maybe all
          those 'other' people are unnecessary... maybe.. but

          I don't work for a small software house and any project in a large
          organisation has many, many people who come together to make
          something happen.

          What I mean by this is that writing quality software, bug free, on
          time and to customer needs is important but... it all means
          relatively little if all the other things are not in place. And those
          other areas have a signficant influence on the software that is built.

          Whilst the idea that a customer can just work directly with a
          development team is a nice one the reality is that 'customer' covers
          a huge spectrum of people.

          Graphic designers
          Operations
          Regional teams
          Rollout managers
          Marketing teams
          Distribution
          Manufacturing (if you happen to have a big device element)
          Health and Safety
          Legal
          Corporate architecture

          oh.. the list goes on...

          All of these are compressed into 'customer'. All of them play a
          critical role in the success of a product. There must be interplay,
          communication and cross-learning between all. These folks must all do
          their job well so that development teams know what to build and can
          get clear answers to their questions. All these inputs influence
          developer.. each may have something of value to offer.. each may
          comment on development (and the converse is true)

          In that context, actual development is but a fraction. A seemingly
          small development change often has a dispropotionate amount of effort
          behind it in the non-development community.

          >
          > >... have you any idea how difficult the Customer role is? I think
          everyone would
          > >agree that poor customer involvement and/or skills is a major
          factor in project
          > >failure.. regardless of whether you have good programmers or not.
          > Yes, but that's not new to XP. What's new is the programmer meeting
          > the customer.
          >

          Sorry, we're at cross purposes.. I was objecting to your rather
          pithy, and somewhat offensive (I'm not *that* offended btw)
          suggestion that only developers had any business commenting on
          development.

          > >Programming has its own disctinct facets but it is not so far
          removed from other
          > >skills that only programmers can comment.
          > For me that's exactly the problem. Anyone can comment. Anyone can
          say
          > "Agile in a day". This is why I'm having to filter Advice!
          > I prefer the Advice of people in the thick-of-it rather than those
          on
          > the sidelines no matter what book they are clutching. It's something
          > like my desire to meet the customer, I want real information.
          >

          Its also often true that its precisely being 'in the thick of it'
          that makes it difficult to take a step back and evaluate.

          Its something of a truism that breakthroughs, inspiration etc rarely
          come from 'experts'.. in fact they often come from people well
          outside the boundaries of any specialism.

          Again, I am simply objecting to the idea that only developers should
          be trusted for advice on development.

          > >>> Advice from people who no longer program - doubt
          > >What? Have they lost their minds? Have they forgotten everything
          they knew? Have
          > >they gained no additional insight from moving from their compilers
          and casting
          > >their net wider?
          > See my other reply from today in this thread about "doubt" not being
          > meant so badly and also the over 40s!
          >

          No problem.. the dangers of throwaway comments I guess. I do it all
          the time, so I can't throw any stones.

          > >Pardon me, but I haven't heard anything faintly new in the world
          of programming
          > >for years!
          > >There has however been lots of progress in organisation, team
          > >structure, social dynamics, improved practices (XP) etc etc
          > Well there has certainly been change, but progress?
          > Did any of it help? How much? Was the introduction more expensive
          than
          > the benefit?

          Well, ten years ago I was merrily developing away using AOLServer,
          Oracle and TCL and wondering why everyone thought this web stuff was
          so hard..

          Now the Java-bloatware that it takes to get a site off the ground is
          mind boggling, time consuming and frankly less reliable. (and it is
          certainly more costly YMMV)



          >
          > Michael
          >
        • Michael KENNY
          ... It is strange that something emphasizing competitive advantage does seem to have been built (amongst other things) on heavy protection and subsidy. You are
          Message 4 of 6 , Feb 12, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 16:58:10 +0000, you wrote:
            >Actually, here I think you do have a subtle point. A great deal is made of
            >Toyota's success.. much of it I'm sure is well deserved... but, the Japanese
            >economic miracle and model for production is not quite what it seems. It now
            >very clear that the balance book simply doesn't add up. I'm sure many Japanese
            >companies have benefited from what has, for a large number of years, been a
            >grossly mis-managed economy subject to few of the contraints we might expect in
            >the UK or America. Money has been readily available at the most ridiculously low
            >(often non existent) interest rates... with that kind of free-money-funnel its
            >hard not to succeed.
            >
            >The way companies seek and acquire funding and the largely comical nature of the
            >Japanese stock market means its perhaps possible for companies like Toyota to
            >succeed where others may have gone to the wall years ago...
            It is strange that something emphasizing competitive advantage does
            seem to have been built (amongst other things) on heavy protection and
            subsidy. You are left wondering what exactly the success story of
            Toyota in the 70s80s was based on, and whether Lean had anything to do
            with it.

            Michael
          • Joseph Little
            Hi, Don t wonder; go and see for yourself. Do an experiment. Genchi Genbutsu is the Lean idea of (literally) go and see for yourself (aka don t manage from
            Message 5 of 6 , Feb 13, 2008
            • 0 Attachment
              Hi,

              Don't wonder; go and see for yourself. Do an experiment.

              Genchi Genbutsu is the Lean idea of (literally) "go and see for
              yourself" (aka "don't manage from behind the desk"). See
              http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genchi_Genbutsu Don't talk philosophy,
              take action.

              As our great Yogi (Yogi Berra) said, "In theory there is no difference
              between theory and practice. In practice, there is."

              Read Taiichi Ohno's book Toyota Production System and try the
              principles out in your work. Try to do a fair experiment. (In my
              opinion, one needs to be clever about this. Manufacturing is not the
              same as new product creation. But still close enough usually for us
              to learn some very useful things.)

              It is not fair to ask Toyota or Lean to account for everything
              happening in Japan. Similarly, it is fair to say that it is not
              wholly clear (from the outside) that the Toyota Production System
              (alone) has defeated General Motors. Although in a *worldwide* race,
              one has to wonder at how impressive TPS seems to be. (And Honda, which
              does very similar things.) Toyota is making cars quite successfully in
              the US, for example. See Jeffrey Liker's books/articles.

              One summary of TPS is that it harnesses the intelligence of every
              worker to continuously improve the "system". That is the key, in the
              eyes of some. Hard for me to see how that could be a bad thing.

              Many others are doing Lean also. Arguably Lean was invented in the
              US, for that matter (Ohno credited Ford, for example). So we need not
              get nationalistic or country-specific about Lean.

              Or, let's talk about the Poppendieck's specific ideas for Lean
              Software Development. Does each one help you, or does it hurt you, or
              neither? I think you will find that most are remarkably like or
              consistent with XP. The few that are really different go into areas
              that Beck, Jeffries and Cunningham had not gotten interested in (yet).
              I do recall that Beck makes many favorable comparisons of XP to Lean.
              Anyway, that's my feeling overall. Perhaps you will remind me of a
              practice that is an exception.

              Regards, Joe


              --- In extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com, Michael KENNY
              <michael.kenny@...> wrote:
              >
              > On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 16:58:10 +0000, you wrote:
              > >Actually, here I think you do have a subtle point. A great deal is
              made of
              > >Toyota's success.. much of it I'm sure is well deserved... but, the
              Japanese
              > >economic miracle and model for production is not quite what it
              seems. It now
              > >very clear that the balance book simply doesn't add up. I'm sure
              many Japanese
              > >companies have benefited from what has, for a large number of
              years, been a
              > >grossly mis-managed economy subject to few of the contraints we
              might expect in
              > >the UK or America. Money has been readily available at the most
              ridiculously low
              > >(often non existent) interest rates... with that kind of
              free-money-funnel its
              > >hard not to succeed.
              > >
              > >The way companies seek and acquire funding and the largely comical
              nature of the
              > >Japanese stock market means its perhaps possible for companies like
              Toyota to
              > >succeed where others may have gone to the wall years ago...
              > It is strange that something emphasizing competitive advantage does
              > seem to have been built (amongst other things) on heavy protection and
              > subsidy. You are left wondering what exactly the success story of
              > Toyota in the 70s80s was based on, and whether Lean had anything to do
              > with it.
              >
              > Michael
              >
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.