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

Re: Playing not to lose != playing to lose (was RE: Why is "Politics" never a part of a methodogy? (a rant))

Expand Messages
  • johnbsims3@netscape.net
    I forgot where I heard it, but it describes most companies philosophy on this kind of stuff: Most people would rather fail doing something conventional
    Message 1 of 2 , Mar 30, 2001
      I forgot where I heard it, but it describes most companies' philosophy
      on this kind of stuff: "Most people would rather fail doing something
      conventional rather than risk doing something unconventional". This
      seems to pretty much sum up how a lot of people respond to XP, and
      want to fall back on the old "tried and true"
      requirements/analysis/design, etc....

      John

      --- In extremeprogramming@y..., wecaputo@t... wrote:
      >
      > Tom Mostyn:
      > >As I stated before, it seems to me that the XPism "don't play not
      to lose,
      > play to win"
      > >presumes that people (non-XPers? software developers?) are playing
      to
      > lose.
      >
      > I don't think the idea is that they are playing to lose, its more
      like they
      > are hedging. Many play to tie, or they don't go for the big win, and
      so
      > lose.
      >
      > This XP principle is intended to remind people that software
      development is
      > risky, and that means if you aren't willing to take the risks you
      won't get
      > the payoffs.
      >
      > Not taking risks == playing not to lose.
      > Taking appropriate risks == playing to win.
      >
      > That's the spirit of the quote IMHO.
      >
      > Best,
      > Bill
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.