Re: Been there. Golden handcuffs were my problem
I need a change of pace. An opportunity for more growth. I'd like to ry my hand at doing X. Seeking new challenges. Seeking a smaller environment etc.
452 publicly visible posts • joined 30 Dec 2014
Life + 50? Why? So the person's freeloading relatives can make money with no work and then brag about what clever business people? And then decry the poor for being lazy parasites? If you want to see parasite go to a pricey resort town and watch all the trust fund babies stuffing their monthly checks up their noses.
Here are some ways sociologists, use what fits https://www.cliffsnotes.com/study-guides/sociology/sociological-research-methods/sociological-research-designs-methods
I think I was talking about observational and case studies. But even so they try match up groups, e.g. while studying education level and it's impact they would try to control for age, ethnicity, income level of the subject's household while growing etc.
As far as burden you can run reports on defect escape rate, features delivered etc. which should be documented somewhere.
Management fixates on surface details; we must use Jira, have standup, sprint planning, training classes etc. So But they do not grasp the underlying spirit and social messages. They buy the books, read the articles etc. but done read deeply enough. It's sort of like "everyone successful is wearing wide ties so I look successful and so will be successful". I somestimes refer to "cargo cult" management or programming.
Your post is a good example of using appropriate tools and being agile when developing software, use what works. If waterfall works, use it.
And then there is the matter of 2 week sprints. Everyone fixates on that. But to be agile you adjust sprints to the the complexity and organizational friction you encounter. Maybe 3 weeks or 4 weeks or whatever you need.
Remember, agile is an adjective not a noun.
Well there is another approach often used in Sociology. Find 2 groups with as much overlap in factors as possible such as tool sets, problem domains, team sizes, maturity of the product etc. Make sure they are using different development methods. Gather data for both projects and compare. Repeat the process for several projects and throw in some longitudinal studies as well. Then over time you'll have a series of naturalistic studies from which inferences can be drawn.
"If you actively manage, oversee and hold the outsourcer's feet to the fire, you can make it work."
If you replace "outsourcer" with employees you are in fact doing nothing different. There is no difference; you cannot walk away from project management, human negotiations, picking the right workers (every time I worked for a body shopI ended up being interviewed by the permanent staff as well as body shop managers), cost controls, etc. There is no free lunch.
In my experience Docker really didn't help much in managing complexity. For any moderately sized project we ended have containers scatter around like jackstraws with hidden dependencies. Stateless is also fo limited value as there was, on my projects, a need to maintain state *somewhere*. So hacks had to be used to not only save state but to ensure consistency. It turned out to be tricky.
They are the professionals. They could, for a fee, helped define the system with the Gov't. I've been through such exercises and this was the way it was done. We had people compare systems, look at workflows, and then help map data and functions. IBM's "you tell us what to do and then we take your word for it" is a cop out.
It seems to have died out but it combined the elements of C, Fortran, and uniquely Canadian constructs. I can't remember all the details but programs looked sort of like this,
While beer>0 eh?
if needsbeer(hoser) eh
openbeer(hoser) eh
if beer < 3 eh
hoser<- buddy eh
fin
fin
It also came with the Hockey framework and the back bacon library.
That reminds me of a story. I was working on a project for a large government organization. We were accepting a new app from a 3rd party and learning the system. The system could run a official report and then save it off. Well it saved it off but for 2 problems; the document which was an important legal document was neither locked nor signed. Which of course meant it could be easily tampered with. I was working QA on that one and flagged as a security breach (said government agency was paranoid about security).
We went to the vendor and asked for a fix. They considered it no big deal. One person went so far as to say "EarthDog cares about it but no one else does". Once our customer found about it they was rather upset.
That lack of professionalism is why I hate working in software.