[Info-vax] OT: Is Software Management Obsolete?

[John Wallace]

On Oct 11, 10:49 am, IanMiller <g... at uk2.net> wrote:
> On Oct 11, 2:43 am, Arne Vajhøj <a... at vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Neil Rieck wrote:
> > > Is Software Management Obsolete?
>
> > >http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tim-berry/is-software-management-ob_b_2...
>
> > > Quote: What DeMarco seems to be saying -- and, at least, what I am
> > > definitely saying -- is that control is ultimately illusory on
> > > software development projects. If you want to move your project
> > > forward, the only reliable way to do that is to cultivate a deep sense
> > > of software craftsmanship and professionalism around it. The guys and
> > > gals who show up every day eager to hone their craft, who are
> > > passionate about building stuff that matters to them, and perhaps in
> > > some small way, to the rest of the world -- those are the people and
> > > projects that will ultimately succeed.
>
> > > This applies to many big corporation projects as well as Ontario's
> > > recent eHealth debacle.
>
> > There is a lot of both correct and new ideas in that, but the
> > correct ideas are not new and the new ideas are not correct.
>
> > * Highly skilled people produce better results than less skilled
> >    people.
>
> > * Enthusiasm is a major driver for becoming highly skilled.
>
> > * Highly skilled people require less supervision and coordination
> >    than less skilled people.
>
> > * The best coordination with the least overhead is when a single
> >    person can do it all.
>
> > That is true. Not just for software development but for all kinds
> > of work.
>
> > But management (supervision, coordination, planning etc.) is
> > needed on projects where a single person can not do it all.
>
> > Arne
>
> Time for  re-issue of the mythical man month book

No re-issue needed, it's still in print. Amazon.co.uk have it for £13,
worth every penny - but the folks who need it won't want to heed it,
by definition.

I'm not sure it's the complete answer anyway. E.g. It has become
fashionable in the part of the industry that does big projects to
value process and standards (and "methodology"), and adherence to
process and standards, instead of untrendy things like competence and
ability to improve the quality of the product/service. I suspect one
reason for this is that "management" are often clueless at evaluating
competence and quality (obviously this is based on companies I have
observed rather than companies I have worked at).

The once-trendy CMMI stuff is an example. There's a lovely two-page
CMMI spoof around but I can't find it right now, where the CMMI levels
are small negative integers corresponding to the destructiveness of
the management regime. Anyone know the one I mean, please?

Joel Spolsky is worth a read, whether you agree with him on everything
or not.