Heather McLean

I was recently re-reading Martin Fowler’s article The New Methodology when I came across a passage that stuck with me:

One of the aims of traditional methodologies is to develop a process where the people involved are replaceable parts. With such a process you can treat people as resources who are available in various types. You have an analyst, some coders, some testers, a manager. The individuals aren’t so important, only the roles are important. That way if you plan a project it doesn’t matter which analyst and which testers you get, just that you know how many you have so you know how the number of resources affects your plan.

But this raises a key question: are the people involved in software development replaceable parts? One of the key features of agile methods is that they reject this assumption.

One of my biggest pet peeves is when managers and planners refer to people as “resources.” I get this visual of a bunch of managers sitting around a table and trading little chits that represent people until everyone is happy with what they have, but all the chits are the same… just commodities to be pushed around from project to project.

When you treat people as interchangeable cogs in a machine, you miss several important factors about your team members:

• People are not equivalent pieces. I refer you of course to the ever-popular book The Mythical Man-Month by Frederick Brooks. If I have estimated¹ that two people can do the work in six months, increasing that to four people does not mean that we will get it done in three months. Team members all have differing levels of expertise and productivity, differing skills and motivations; you must know how to leverage these individual talents rather than lumping them together as a whole.
• People bring the greatest benefits and the biggest hindrances to the project. When you reduce them to a column on a spreadsheet, you are naïvely discounting their individual personalities and quirks. People can have breakthroughs that cut development time in half. They can also have a family emergency and lose you a week of production.²
• People are perceptive. They know when they’re being treated as faceless automatons rather than real human beings, and they will resent you for it. Don’t ever believe that your team members aren’t keenly aware of how you talk about them behind closed doors.
• People have preferences and motivations. Assigning people to tasks that they may be good at but hate is counter-intuitive. Yes, Bob may be a database whiz, but if he hates the reporting engine, assigning him to fixing the reports isn’t going to be the best utilization. Assign people to tasks that they enjoy, even if it’s not their strong suit; they’ll be more productive and learn a broader range of skills. Conversely, don’t let people pigeon hole themselves—ask them to branch out every once in a while and leave their comfort zones.
• People have lives beyond work. Don’t plan for people to have 100% attendance. Don’t even plan for them to work 40 hours per week. As I mentioned above, people are perceptive, and if they feel you are treating their personal lives as secondary to work, they will resent you for it, and morale and productivity will plummet.

The next meeting of the Fort Worth chapter of the APLN is on Tuesday, October 13, 2009. The speakers will be Ken Howard and Barry Rogers of Improving Enterprises.

Abstract: This highly interactive and fun session takes a refreshing look at the human element with actionable techniques that targets individuals and their interactions. Many believe that Agile is less about specific processes and tools and more about effective teams and productive communication. The first value of the Agile Manifesto emphasizes individuals and interactions yet everywhere you look the focus seems to be on processes and tools. Topics range from enhancing interpersonal communication (Tango) to effectively leveraging the anatomy of your team (Square Dance).

For more information, contact Charles Seaman at fortworthapln@gmail.com.

After a while of putting it off, I finally upgraded my WordPress installation tonight to the latest version. Sadly, I had a moment of silliness and accidentally deleted my wp-content folder, which contains all of my uploaded images among other things. I’ve restored a couple of them, the rest are on a different computer that I’ll have to get later. Luckily my site doesn’t have many images.

Just further proof that even supposedly brilliant people can make really dumb mistakes from time to time.

Updated 9/11/09: Okay, looks like everything should be back in order now… at least until next time.

After a discussion of the merits of various web service technologies with a colleague of mine, I decided to do a little programming exercise. I felt I hadn’t really gotten to do any seriously complex programming in a while, so it was nice to exercise my brain a bit and learn some new things. I basically implemented a REST web service stack in .NET. It has both a server and client model. For the client, it’s as simple as decorating an interface:

[RestWebClient(Url = "http://local.yahooapis.com/MapsService/V1")]
public interface IYahooTrafficService : IRestWebService
{
    [RestNoun("trafficData", Method = RestHttpMethod.GET)]
    [return: RestReturnType(RestReturnType.Xml)]
    XmlDocument GetTrafficData(string appid, string street, string city, string state);
}

The example here uses the Yahoo Traffic Data API. Once the interface is created, I can get a concrete instance through the RestWebClient factory:

IYahooTrafficService svc = RestWebClient.Create<IYahooTrafficService>();
XmlDocument xdoc = svc.GetTrafficData("YdnDemo", "1771 LBJ Fwy", "Dallas", "TX");

And voila! Traffic data:

Example of output from the Yahoo! Traffic Data API.

Pretty simple, and it works with a variety of REST interfaces. It can also handle complex types through XML and binary serialization as well as straight binary streams, such as image files. The server piece works similar to the client; decorate a class with attributes to describe the service contract, and an HttpHandler does the rest.

This was particularly challenging on the client piece because I had to learn the System.Reflection.Emit namespace, which I had never used before, and it requires an in-depth knowledge of MSIL. So that was difficult at first, frustrating most of the time, and rewarding in the end.

At some point I would like to clean up the code and release it as open source. Some other folks might actually find it useful. It definitely needs some heavy refactoring first, though.