Re: Re: Sticking point

On Wednesday, December 11, 2002, at 7:16:39 PM, Glen B. Alleman <[email protected]> wrote:

> Extreme to the limit. Too bad, since the folks most in need of agile, 
> aren't found of listening to extremist.

That's OK. If some people I've been hearing from lately are any
example, they aren't fond of listening at all, especially when the
message isn't Yes Sir No Excuse Sir.

> XC (I thought) was a attempt to de-tox some of the verbage so it 
> could be heard by decision makers to improve their lot in life.

That is the avowed purpose, it is true. However what is really
happening is that almost every single notion, idea, or suggestion that
is put forth by the people here who know XP is flat rejected by Bill
as "that dog won't hunt", "some guy I know won't listen to that", "you
can't say it that way", "some other guy I have heard of might expect
XP to work some other way that I can't specify", and so on.

> But if you're here to bring it to the limit, maybe your job in life 
> is to be the grain of sand in that produces the pearl. 

These assessments in your past few notes addressed to me are well
outside the rules of the list in my opinion. They do not offend me,
since that is quite hard to do, but they come across as quite
personal, quite negative in tone, and frankly unproductive. Is that on
purpose? But I digress ...

To a point which might reside inside the comment, the "extreme" nature
of Extreme Programming: well, XP is properly named. It is not a
feel-good let's all say we're XP because we can now turn on a billion
dollars instead of a 1.1 billion kind of idea.

XP is balls to the wall, afterburners on, screaming 7G blackout
inducing loop, roll out, go in the other direction Right Now Bang.
   (please make whatever translations a real pilot would make to the
   above metaphor to give it technical accuracy. I'm sure you get my
   point.)

XP is offering revolutionary thinking -- very simple thinking but
revolutionary nonetheless -- to software development and to other
aspects of business.

If the Late Or At Least Moribund Adopters that Bill wants to address
have to have the revolutionary aspects watered down for their
consumption, then that won't be XP. NOW HEAR ME: this does not mean
that a guy like you in a big, regulated, complex, risky environment
has to do every XP practice and only XP practices to be doing what XP
teaches. It does mean that every move one makes needs to be informed
by the values of Simplicity, Communication, Feedback, and Courage, as
well as by all the technical and management and every other kind of
expertise that the team can bring to bear.

To be doing XP, one can never give up on reducing complexity,
improving communication, and increasing feedback. From the outside
looking in, an observer might see something that seems too complex.
That observer might think it should be made more simple. She might
even suggest it.

The answer "we can't do that", or "things aren't done that way around
here", or "there is no data to support that" are not convincing to the
observer. You object when people can't support their opinions about
XP, and when they do it in any form other than one you like, you
object even though they are doing their best. That goes both ways. "We
can't do that" is not convincing, it is not proof, and from the
outside it is indistinguishable from "we don't want to do that" or "we
aren't listening to you".

All this stuff cuts both ways. XP is not on trial here. You have made
your own honest, sincere, and thoughtful choices, and have adopted
some XP stuff and have apparently benefited by it. That is great, and
in fact you've done it without all that data that you kept asking for
and never got. It would be interesting to know why you decided to go
ahead when all you could get was Zen Sayings.

XP is what it is. A lot of people are here on this group, and on the
XP group, explaining it as best they can, in a lot of different
styles. You picked good value out of that torrent somehow. Other
executives who are worth their pay can do so as well.

I have known many executives, and few of them needed their hands held.
Few of them feared confrontation or direct speech. Most of them were
comfortable with passion and indeed worked to create it. They
tolerated uniqueness, nurtured creativity, respected people for what
they are, for what they can do, and for what they contribute.

I haven't met many executives like Bill is worried about, and the very
few I have were frankly unfit to hold the toilet seat for the others.

Real executives aren't afraid of computer programmers.

Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
Sorry about your cow ... I didn't know she was sacred.


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get 128 Bit SSL Encryption!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/CBxunD/vN2EAA/xGHJAA/NhFolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
extremecustomering-unsubscribe-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw@public.gmane.org

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/