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

Re: On wanting success (was Re: [XP] cons of XP -- on "success")

Expand Messages
  • Jonas Bengtsson
    Hello merrifie, ... I don t think it s only the manager who are to blame. The traditional view of a manager is that s/he has the responsibility for the
    Message 1 of 98 , Mar 1, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Hello merrifie,

      Friday, March 01, 2002, 4:23:04 AM, you wrote:

      > --- In extremeprogramming@y..., "geektank" wrote:
      >> --- In extremeprogramming@y..., "Charlie Poole" wrote:
      >>
      >> > A good manager over an XP team would be clearing
      >> > obstacles rather trying to control how things are done.
      >> >
      >> > Of course, the hard thing is to convince a manager to act
      >> > that way.
      >>
      >> I've always been told that this is how all good manager's act,
      >> regardless what sort of team they manage.

      > Yes, good managers act this way. These are managers who work for
      > their staff. The other kind of manager thinks his staff works for
      > him. This type of manager thinks the other type is weak. They don't
      > think good managers should act this way and don't think their own
      > sytle is bad. If you have one of these managers, you can't convince
      > them to act differently.

      > -- Mike
      > Eugene, OR

      I don't think it's only the manager who are to blame. The traditional
      view of a manager is that s/he has the responsibility for the project.
      Since s/he has the responsibility and the overview etc. s/he shall
      delegate all the work and ensure that it gets done properly. Thus, a
      manager both have the traditional opinions about what s/he ought to
      do, as well as demand from the subordinates who expect the manager to
      act according to the traditional view.


      Best regards,
      Jonas

      When you come to a fork in the road, take it!
      - Yogi Berra
    • Dossy
      ... Yes. I feel the way you rephrased what I said is a good way of distilling what I was trying to say from what I actually said. I d even go so far as to say
      Message 98 of 98 , Mar 2, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        Dossy said:
        > > All the XP practices are the simplest (leanest?) way of achieving
        > > each necessary piece of the software development process, and
        > > in such a manner, support each other making each practice even
        > > that more useful than the practice by itself. That's why I
        > > say that substituting a different solution instead of doing the
        > > XP practice will be less effective.

        Dale said:
        > Here's my interpretation: XP has only essential practices. Other
        > methodologies include helpful-but-nonessential practices that you
        > might be able to remove safely. But if you remove a practice from XP,
        > you're removing something that is (very likely to be) essential to
        > your success.
        >
        > Am I getting the cause-and-effect right?

        Yes. I feel the way you rephrased what I said is a good way
        of distilling what I was trying to say from what I actually said.

        I'd even go so far as to say that XP's "essential practices" aren't
        even always essential for every single possible project. However,
        you can never be certain which practices aren't possible at the
        start of the project, so you're best bet is to do them all at the
        start. Then, decide how to adapt as experience guides you.

        -- Dossy

        --
        Dossy Shiobara mail: dossy@...
        Panoptic Computer Network web: http://www.panoptic.com/
        "He realized the fastest way to change is to laugh at your own
        folly -- then you can let go and quickly move on." (p. 70)
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.