How we describe things, how we communicate is a window to how we think. If our words and phrases are vague and sloppy, it means our thinking is vague and sloppy. And I deliberately used "means" and not "suggests".
This is why I dislike phrases like Engagement Management (instead of "How do we want to interact with our clients?"), Knowledge Management (instead of "How can we learn from each other?"), and really "Anything Management".
Even saying things like "waterfall", "Agile", "death march" is sloppy. The terms are convenient because you don't have to describe the specifics of the current context but that's why they're sloppy.
Yahoo!7 Girl Geek Dinner Pictures & Screencast
-
Above are some pictures from the Girl Geek Dinner night at Yahoo!7 If you
have photos on flickr please add them to the pool too. Pool/Group ID
1173495@...
3 weeks ago
7 comments:
Is this not a different version of a "pattern".
When I talk to somebody about these techniques or functions, is it not appropriate to use a "human pattern" to describe it, like we do "technical patterns" ?
You might find the subject of E-Prime useful. E-Prime consists of English without the verb 'to be'. Modern day Physicists often use E-Prime (but call it something different: Operationalism) and a few people advocate its wider use to increase scientific rigor.
Let me offer a small example:
English:
Ruby is cool.
E-Prime:
Ruby allows me to program more succinctly.
I've found using E-Prime a useful buffer against an all too often religious impulse found in the software development community.
Jon, do you mean that using "waterfall", "Agile" is like using "Singleton", "Abstract Factory"? If so, I don't actually like using pattern names over talking about what's happening either. At some point, I'll acknowledge that we would develop some kind of short hand but the short hand is not where we should start.
E-prime is very interesting. It reminds me of The Curious Incident of the Dog at Midnight where the main character doesn't get metaphor but is fine with simile.
I take your point about sloppy language and sloppy thinking, but not all the examples you cite represent sloppy language. For instance, "death march" is a convenience term that denotes a very well-understood phenomenon, in the context of software development projects.
It is not necessary to reiterate verbally the analysis of what constitutes a "death march" every single time a person wants to mention the phenomenon. Everyone in our profession knows the phenomenon is real, and we all have a pretty clear notion of what causes it. Using a convenience term doesn't mean (or suggest) we're being sloppy in our thinking; it only means we don't feel like doing a verbal brain dump every time we speak.
Hi Dave,
"pretty clear" is sometimes not clear enough. Specifically, I've heard "death march" thrown around for relatively minor schedule trouble on projects. I'd submit that the majority of people in our profession have not read Death March, including me, and I'm not confident it's well understood.
Granted, I don't always feel like brain dumping all the time either. My point is that sometimes I need to override my fatigue and be clearer in my expression and thinking.
Something i have learned working in software development for the last 8 years is that developer personalities have a big impact on whether more waterfall or agile-type processes are used. Some developers prefer the short timelines and frequent feedback and checking of requirements whilst others prefer clearer direction from the start and more concrete deadlines. And of course, when you have a team, it's often difficult to get the right balance
Post a Comment