> The thing is, no matter what development approach is taken, > lots of doc, little doc, there is a key factor most places ignore. > Development team motivation. You show me a motivated, empowered, and usually small > development team, and I'll show you an unbeatable combination for a > project. Such a team could be harmed by Agile or harmed by > doc-to-the-max.
Defending the 'doc-to-the-max' approach, there's a subtle consideration that deserves mention: that sometimes looking at even a (scanned) scribbled note brings back a conversation or line of thinking. True, it's nice to have fleshed out explanations instead of just a scribbled note, and this is an extreme example, but we do deal with mountains of information and, for small shops especially, there just aren't the resources to pretty everything up. > And when the motivation is gone, so is the productivity. They > key is to match the process to the team, not force the team to a process. Best > situation: let the team choose the process they want. You may > think the 'lazy' approach would always be taken. And maybe it would for > the first project. But when a team actually sees they have the power to change > things, you'd be surprised what results. No question you're right. Also I think MS's "out with the old, in with the new" handling of the software proposition has done much damage to dedicated people, because there is no semblance of permanence to the work. When we coded assembler solutions in the 70's, we had every reason to think we were building something that would last "forever", but in the MS world it doesn't work that way, it's all here today, gone tomorrow, and that feeds a different breed of - CYA - people who are better at surviving then building. Bill > -Charlie _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
