RE: Re: Sticking point

Andrey,

I repeat a discussion I presented some time ago.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrey 
> 
> Up to this point, you have only hypotheses, right?..

[>] The "scientific method" is not at work here. This is not a peer
reviewed journal I'm working for. I am the Director of a function inside
our commercial company. The value added in that role is to move forward
in some manner - no matter how small - with the experience and judgments
developed from the past.
> 
>  GBA> Unlike a private small entrepreneurial firm we do have the
luxury to
>  GBA> "experiment" on others peoples money, so another approach is
needed
>  GBA> to deploy process improvement processes.
> 
> .. which you can verify through experiment.
> 
> So, have you done experiments to verify which XP practices work in
your
> environment?

[>] Experimenting in the process improvement domain is very interesting
work; wish I could have that job. Funding those experiments is the
challenge though. Making improvement - even small incremental ones -
without experimental funding is called "contract mal-conformance."

If it were my money funding this org, I could do lots of experiments,
it's not my money.

>  GBA> Our sources for these decisions include local SPINS, XP Denver
> members,
>  GBA> neighboring business that focus on software process improvement,
>  GBA> conference proceedings, IEEE and ACM papers and articles,
managers
> how
>  GBA> have worked in XP environments, deployed XP into telecom
> environments
>  GBA> etc. etc. etc.
> 
> Yes, these are sources for your hypotheses and experiment setup.
What's
> _your_ data?
> 
> See, I'm former scientist and I have strong distinction between
> hypotheses,
> literature references and experiments done by myself.  Often those
three
> are very different.

[>] Then you must also have a source of funds to conduct these
experiments. I too have a science (physics) background, and we're in the
engineering business not the science business. Engineers tend to look
things up in books, apply what worked from the past and ask around fro
good idea.

>  GBA> So when I say "can't" I mean just that "can't." Not I'm afraid
>  GBA> to
>  >> try,
>  GBA> not I haven't tried yet. I'm not dissuading others, on the
>  GBA> contrary
>  >> I'm
>  GBA> describing how we have moved forward within the confines of the
>  GBA> DOE
>  >> to
>  GBA> bring appropriate XP practices to bear on the problems of the
>  GBA> day.
>  >>
>  >> Reread your email twice.  What I've got is that you _can_ but you
>  GBA> _won't_.
>  >> So, what's non-actionable in saying "I won't."?
>  >>
>  GBA> [>] If you read "I can but I won't" you are correct. I won't,
can't,
>  GBA> prevented from doing ... because of the work environment
boundaries
> of a
>  GBA> federal agency contract.
> 
> Isn't still _your_ decision that you "won't"?
> 
> By insisting (sorry) on "won't" instead of "can't" I'm trying to put
the
> power, the free will to where it belongs originally -- to yourself.
When
> one discovers he really has the power, amazing things happen...

[>] this approach is now tiring, if you feel better with confusing "not
allowed to by contract or regulation" with "won't" fine. I don't make
that confusion. Try it the other way and drop the Zen Master vocabulary
and semantic details. We task by our customer to deliver within the
compliance of a contract. We make every attempt to push back.

> --
> Andrey 

[>]Glen B. Alleman


------------------------ 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/