Re: "I've tried it" doesn't instill interest

So said  Bill Tozier  on  2003-01-10 --------------------

>On Friday, Jan 10, 2003, at 16:33 America/Detroit, J. B. Rainsberger 
>wrote:
>
>> So said  Bill Tozier  on  2003-01-10 --------------------
>>> Are you sure you've identified the criteria by which your
>>> audience is gaging success?
>>
>> Obviously not. That's ridiculously complex. No one could do it, so why 
>> would I try?
>
>Good point. Let's take a different tack for a moment.
>
>Recall that we're chatting about the problem: Why do people who are 
>presented with evidence of a better way of doing their work choose not 
>to do their work that way?
>
>Modern economic theory [caveat lector] would argue that people 
>adopt/buy into something when the perceived benefits outweigh the 
>perceived costs, factoring in their risk aversion. The approach of 
>explaining, in exhaustive detail, how many vast benefits XP will bring 
>to somebody sometimes doesn't work. Is it because (as Ron ((if I parsed 
>the thread right)) pointed out) the listener doesn't *get* what the 
>seller is trying to communicate, or that the seller is perceived as an 
>a[5|6]e? Or is it perhaps that the seller has not addressed some 
>aspects of cost of change that the listener sees?

I believe that there are few parts to this adoption problem.

1. The prospective adopter does not understand that he is not doing a good-enough job. (The language here is intentionally sloppy.)
2. The prospective adopter does not understand how XP can help him to a good-enough job. (Does not see cause and effect.)

(1) is tough because the industry insists on hiring and retaining crappy programmers. It is normal and reasonable for those programmers to think themselves good enough, even though they're crappy, because they continue to be hired. When they stop being hired, they chalk it up to the economy, rather than their own lack of understanding or skill. I don't know how to (gently) make someone see that.

(2) is straightforward to understand, but difficult to change, because the individual generally needs to be naturally receptive before being willing to expose himself to XP long enough to see the cause and effect. I find this strange, because I saw it right away, believed it right away.

>Or we could try another tack: There are a lot of people who adopt 
>technologies/products/innovations late, not early (which is why they're 
>called "late majority" adopters). Frankly it doesn't matter what the 
>proposal is, or their reasons are, they just aren't going to do 
>anything right away. Given that you want to get practical about selling 
>XP, what is the proper response when you have found you're selling to 
>somebody who just isn't going to try it? Try again? Take it personally?

Neither. I move on to the next guy, handing the first my card and saying, "If you change your mind..." I don't know how to do something else effectively.

>>> In other words, you and your audience may have the same goals, but
>>> different values.
>>
>> Indeed. I want to be honest.
>
>Yes. Me too. But there are other values in play as well. I'm not 
>talking about XP's Values, I'm talking about personal values: the 
>subjective criteria upon which one judges the usefulness of a proposal. 
>As you say, you can't know the other person's (and might not know 
>yours).

I think I know why I adopted XP.[1]

1. On my project, quality was a serious problem.
2. I wanted to solve the problem.
3. I knew how to use Google.
4. I found JUnit.
5. I found XP.
6. I read XP Installed.
7. XP Installed resonated with me in terms of the value proposition of early, continuous testing and continual skill sharing.

From there, it was just a long string of "Yes!" moments.

Why is that so rare?


J. B. Rainsberger,
President, Diaspar Software Services
Let's write software that people understand.
http://www.diasparsoftware.com/
telephone: +1 416 791-8603
All correspondence (c) 2002 Diaspar Software Services.
If you want to use it, just ask; don't steal.


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]

 

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