Mi presentación en #agiles2011
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
Saturday, September 3, 2011
CMMI = Control & Agile = {Collaboration/Cultivation}
Pete Behrens gave a talk on The Culture of Agility @Agile2011 that left me thinking on the topic of my latest posts, the relationship between CMMI and Agile.
In his presentation, he shows a quadrant which contains 4 different types of cultures:
And he defined certain characteristics for each culture. Look the characteristics for a control culture:
This really looks like CMMI, right?. "Policy and procedures are extremely important", "The system is more important than people" (these phrases really sound as the explanation that CMMI gives as to why processes are so important "What holds everything together? It is the processes used in your organization. Processes allow you to align the way you do business. They allow you to address scalability and provide a way to incorporate knowledge of how to do things better. Processes allow you to leverage your resources and to examine business trends.")
Look now the characteristics of a Collaboration Culture:
And the Cultivation Culture:
These really look like Agile, right?
Look now the characteristics of personal and impersonal cultures:
These one's REALLY looked like Agile on the left side and CMMI on the right side. It is clear that CMMI would fit a control culture much better than a collaboration/cultivation culture and , inversely, Agile fits perfectly on collaboration/cultivation cultures. It's clear how Agile is "Personal", while CMMI is "Impersonal".
So what about compatibility. From the perspective of culture, what is the result of combining them?
I can imagine a couple of scenarios. In a collaboration/cultivation culture, applying CMMI would push the organization culture towards a more Control/Impersonal culture. From the other side, a control organization (which may be CMMI certified, as it's totally compliant) and wants to become more Agile may encounter a CMMI an obstacle.
So in the culture context, I see the 2 forces going in opposite directions.
Could this be synergetic or complementary or the effect would be the total opposite? Could this lead to an undefined culture or to an organization where employees are confused on their culture and values?
In his presentation, he shows a quadrant which contains 4 different types of cultures:
And he defined certain characteristics for each culture. Look the characteristics for a control culture:
Look now the characteristics of a Collaboration Culture:
These really look like Agile, right?
Look now the characteristics of personal and impersonal cultures:
These one's REALLY looked like Agile on the left side and CMMI on the right side. It is clear that CMMI would fit a control culture much better than a collaboration/cultivation culture and , inversely, Agile fits perfectly on collaboration/cultivation cultures. It's clear how Agile is "Personal", while CMMI is "Impersonal".
So what about compatibility. From the perspective of culture, what is the result of combining them?
I can imagine a couple of scenarios. In a collaboration/cultivation culture, applying CMMI would push the organization culture towards a more Control/Impersonal culture. From the other side, a control organization (which may be CMMI certified, as it's totally compliant) and wants to become more Agile may encounter a CMMI an obstacle.
So in the culture context, I see the 2 forces going in opposite directions.
Sunday, July 24, 2011
Software Craftsmen Movement
When software development started, perhaps I guess about 50 years ago (probably more), I believe programming was the most important task in all software development life-cycle. Other tasks or phases probably didn't exist. They were embedded in what they called programming (right, the old ones?). After a few years, we started learning how to develop software better. This learning derived in methodologies that were created. In these methodologies, new phases such as analysis and designed appeared and in many of them, those phases became more important than programming itself. This was weird because the actual task of building the software lost importance. In heavyweight waterfall methodologies, analysis and design took most of the work. Programming was just a translation work that could be performed (probably by anyone) when all the important work had already been done.
Changing the subject, I usually asked myself: How do we, programmers, know that we do our work correctly? Programming is one of those jobs where anyone, with google's help, can combine a few frameworks, throw a few lines of code and create a basic software system. But does that make you a good programmer? Another circumstance which perhaps is different than in other areas, is that our job market has been in need of professionals for many years, absorbing most or all the people in the field. So for many of use, getting a job as a programmer as been an easy thing. We just got off from University and they were waiting for us. But does that make us good programmers? I believe I can speak on behalf of lots of people when I say that we go from receiving very theoretical classes of Computer Science at University to try to resolve down to earth problems using a programming language. And this happens, a lot of times, without guidance (because supossedly we learned this at University?). Or isn't it true that lots of us have throw our first few thousands of lines of code to production without anyone checking them? I wonder: who teaches us how we should do our job as programmers, the day to day tasks. I'm not talking about learning a programming language. I'm talking about how to use it to resolve a problem, which is the best process to do it, what are the techniques. This lack of guidance, of someone that verifies our first steps, of someone that shows us the way, makes it difficult for us to understand how we progress in our career. The leap from finishing University to becoming a good programmer is huge. And how do we fill it? How are we supposed to know what it takes to be a good programmer? Is there any curricula we could follow? Is there a career path somewhere? For sure, I wasn't aware of one.
I believe those are the 2 main reasons that fueled the creation of the software craftsmanship movement. Agile was in part a revolution against the essence of heavyweighted methodologies. A revolution that put the programming task as the most important task in all software development life-cycle again. The software craftsmanship movement took this revolution a step further. The actual task of coding the software is the most important task and it is not by any means a simple task. It is a task that requires understanding the business problem to solve, model it in the best possible way, program it using a programming language and by many programmers who all need to agree and implement the same model. To add more complexity, many times the business scenarios change and software needs to change, to adapt to those changes. University doesn't prepare us for this job and companies need developers developing as soon as possible.
The Software Crafstmanship Manifesto states the following:
The first important thing to note in this manifesto is that it treats software programming as a craft. A craft is by the dictionary "an art, trade, or occupation requiring special skill, especially manual skill". A clear example of a craft is a carpenter. And how do you learn the carpenter's craft? First you start besides a carpenter as an apprentice and follow him, for a lot of time. Then you start doing small things on your own. And after a long time you master that craft and are able to perform it on your own. Look how different it looks from the path that many of us have followed. Also note that a craft is something that needs to be practiced. Software craftsmen practice their profession not only daily at work, but also through code katas and getting together to improve their craft in code retreats.
Look at the values now. Not just software, but well crafted software. Although some people may say that well crafted software is not the goal (producing value is), software craftsmen know that the best way of producing value is to produce good software,software that is robust, adaptable and can keep growing and producing value for a long period of time. I believe the third value indicates what should be the way to achieve this. A community of professionals. Through the software craftmanship community, I believe that now it's possible to follow a career path that takes you from apprentice to good developer. Professionals on this community are very open to teach what they know and help others become good professionals.
The software craftsmanship movement provided a new perspective to our profession of software programmers. It stressed the importance of programming and also of becoming a good programmer. And it also indicated the way to achieve this. A programmer should start as an apprentice who learns from someone that knows the craft. With practice, and more practice, this apprentice will learn the craft and become a good programmer.
Changing the subject, I usually asked myself: How do we, programmers, know that we do our work correctly? Programming is one of those jobs where anyone, with google's help, can combine a few frameworks, throw a few lines of code and create a basic software system. But does that make you a good programmer? Another circumstance which perhaps is different than in other areas, is that our job market has been in need of professionals for many years, absorbing most or all the people in the field. So for many of use, getting a job as a programmer as been an easy thing. We just got off from University and they were waiting for us. But does that make us good programmers? I believe I can speak on behalf of lots of people when I say that we go from receiving very theoretical classes of Computer Science at University to try to resolve down to earth problems using a programming language. And this happens, a lot of times, without guidance (because supossedly we learned this at University?). Or isn't it true that lots of us have throw our first few thousands of lines of code to production without anyone checking them? I wonder: who teaches us how we should do our job as programmers, the day to day tasks. I'm not talking about learning a programming language. I'm talking about how to use it to resolve a problem, which is the best process to do it, what are the techniques. This lack of guidance, of someone that verifies our first steps, of someone that shows us the way, makes it difficult for us to understand how we progress in our career. The leap from finishing University to becoming a good programmer is huge. And how do we fill it? How are we supposed to know what it takes to be a good programmer? Is there any curricula we could follow? Is there a career path somewhere? For sure, I wasn't aware of one.
I believe those are the 2 main reasons that fueled the creation of the software craftsmanship movement. Agile was in part a revolution against the essence of heavyweighted methodologies. A revolution that put the programming task as the most important task in all software development life-cycle again. The software craftsmanship movement took this revolution a step further. The actual task of coding the software is the most important task and it is not by any means a simple task. It is a task that requires understanding the business problem to solve, model it in the best possible way, program it using a programming language and by many programmers who all need to agree and implement the same model. To add more complexity, many times the business scenarios change and software needs to change, to adapt to those changes. University doesn't prepare us for this job and companies need developers developing as soon as possible.
The Software Crafstmanship Manifesto states the following:
As aspiring Software Craftsmen we are raising the bar of professional software development by practicing it and helping others learn the craft. Through this work we have come to value:
- Not only working software, but also well-crafted software
- Not only responding to change, but also steadily adding value
- Not only individuals and interactions, but also a community of professionals
- Not only customer collaboration, but also productive partnerships
That is, in pursuit of the items on the left we have found the items on the right to be indispensable.
The first important thing to note in this manifesto is that it treats software programming as a craft. A craft is by the dictionary "an art, trade, or occupation requiring special skill, especially manual skill". A clear example of a craft is a carpenter. And how do you learn the carpenter's craft? First you start besides a carpenter as an apprentice and follow him, for a lot of time. Then you start doing small things on your own. And after a long time you master that craft and are able to perform it on your own. Look how different it looks from the path that many of us have followed. Also note that a craft is something that needs to be practiced. Software craftsmen practice their profession not only daily at work, but also through code katas and getting together to improve their craft in code retreats.
Look at the values now. Not just software, but well crafted software. Although some people may say that well crafted software is not the goal (producing value is), software craftsmen know that the best way of producing value is to produce good software,software that is robust, adaptable and can keep growing and producing value for a long period of time. I believe the third value indicates what should be the way to achieve this. A community of professionals. Through the software craftmanship community, I believe that now it's possible to follow a career path that takes you from apprentice to good developer. Professionals on this community are very open to teach what they know and help others become good professionals.
The software craftsmanship movement provided a new perspective to our profession of software programmers. It stressed the importance of programming and also of becoming a good programmer. And it also indicated the way to achieve this. A programmer should start as an apprentice who learns from someone that knows the craft. With practice, and more practice, this apprentice will learn the craft and become a good programmer.
Monday, July 4, 2011
Code & Beyond: Video: ¿Qué esperas de Agile? con Federico Zuppa
Code & Beyond: Video: ¿Qué esperas de Agile? con Federico Zuppa: "Este video es de una de las reuniones mensuales de Agiles @ Buenos Aires , pero me había quedado en el tintero procesarlo y publicarlo, así..."
Wednesday, June 15, 2011
The Lean Tribe
The Agile Manifesto triggered the growth of "the so called until that moment lightweight methodologies". Scrum and XP became very popular and the tribes associated to them grew with them. However, not long after the Agile Manifesto was signed a new actor entered the scene with outreagous strength. His friends use to call him "Lean" :-)
So what is Lean? Lean has its roots in the Toyota Production System developed by Taichi Ohno. Its core idea is to maximize customer value while minimizing waste.
Lean was brought into the Agile world by Mary and Tom Poppendieck who in their book "Lean Software Development: An Agile toolkit" translated 7 lean principles used in manufacturing to software development language.
Although Lean and Agile share many of the same values and principles as they both are people centric and empower people and they both try to adapt/improve the process continually, they also have some differences as well. The main one in my opinion is its main objective: Agile was developed mostly by software developers and therefore its main objetive is "to uncover better ways of developing software". Lean has in its essence a broader objective (and a broader target) as it seeks to improve the flow of value and this could only happen at an organizational level.
The Agile world was greatly modified by the entrance of Lean. So much that probably now it is an Agile/Lean world.
So who are the referents of this new Lean tribe. Where do they get together. Do they breed with Agile folks? :D I know I may be missing many of the referents of the manufacture industries but these are the ones I know:
- Mary and Tom Poppendieck
- Eli Goldratt (RIP)
- David Anderson
- Karl Scotland
- Alan Shalloway
These folks get together in conferences like "Lean Software and Systems" (in its website, you'll be able to find all the speakers that attended in 2011)
In the last few years, the Lean tribe grew incredibly fast. Particularly, a lean tool called Kanban has gained a great deal of attention and is becoming the new "Scrum" of the moment (or the new star of the moment).
How is the relationship between Agile and Lean? Well, I believe that although there have been some fights (or discussions should I say) because sometimes tribes defend their interests, the Agile community has a lot to learn from the Lean community. Although in the Agile world, Lean is new, it really is much older than Agile.
So what is Lean? Lean has its roots in the Toyota Production System developed by Taichi Ohno. Its core idea is to maximize customer value while minimizing waste.
Lean was brought into the Agile world by Mary and Tom Poppendieck who in their book "Lean Software Development: An Agile toolkit" translated 7 lean principles used in manufacturing to software development language.
Although Lean and Agile share many of the same values and principles as they both are people centric and empower people and they both try to adapt/improve the process continually, they also have some differences as well. The main one in my opinion is its main objective: Agile was developed mostly by software developers and therefore its main objetive is "to uncover better ways of developing software". Lean has in its essence a broader objective (and a broader target) as it seeks to improve the flow of value and this could only happen at an organizational level.
The Agile world was greatly modified by the entrance of Lean. So much that probably now it is an Agile/Lean world.
So who are the referents of this new Lean tribe. Where do they get together. Do they breed with Agile folks? :D I know I may be missing many of the referents of the manufacture industries but these are the ones I know:
- Mary and Tom Poppendieck
- Eli Goldratt (RIP)
- David Anderson
- Karl Scotland
- Alan Shalloway
These folks get together in conferences like "Lean Software and Systems" (in its website, you'll be able to find all the speakers that attended in 2011)
In the last few years, the Lean tribe grew incredibly fast. Particularly, a lean tool called Kanban has gained a great deal of attention and is becoming the new "Scrum" of the moment (or the new star of the moment).
How is the relationship between Agile and Lean? Well, I believe that although there have been some fights (or discussions should I say) because sometimes tribes defend their interests, the Agile community has a lot to learn from the Lean community. Although in the Agile world, Lean is new, it really is much older than Agile.
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Agile Tribes
The people that got together 10 years ago in Salt Lake City had different backgrounds, specialties, positions, etc.There were some folks already working on their own methodologies, such as Beck with XP, Schwaber and Sutherland with Scrum and Cockburn with Crystal. Some of them were more technical, specializing in OO, programming and testing while some others were managers or people more interested in the methodology aspects of software development. This is more or less what I believe were the backgrounds that depict the folks that were there:
Now I wonder how these 'tribes' (or communities or subfields of interests - I wonder what is the best name) develop over the years. How did they grow or mutated? Which are the new tribes that make up the Agile world?. Who are the new referents of these tribes? Will you help me create this map?
How do I define what a tribe is? Let's list some items that define a tribe:
I will focus on the first 3 groups, as the last 2 exist since the beggining of Agile.
I'd love to receive suggestions/corrections, etc.
Now I wonder how these 'tribes' (or communities or subfields of interests - I wonder what is the best name) develop over the years. How did they grow or mutated? Which are the new tribes that make up the Agile world?. Who are the new referents of these tribes? Will you help me create this map?
How do I define what a tribe is? Let's list some items that define a tribe:
- They share the same values and principles (which should enter the big Agile umbrella)
- They work with a certain methodology or method
- They have some referents
- They get together in one of more congresses (this could be a consequence of the previous)
- Reason to be (values/principles they share, objectives)
- History
- Referents
- Present/Future?
- Kanbaners
- Software Craftsmen
- Lean-startupers
- Scrumers
- XPs
I will focus on the first 3 groups, as the last 2 exist since the beggining of Agile.
I'd love to receive suggestions/corrections, etc.
Monday, May 23, 2011
log4jdbc: Una herramienta muy útil en desarrollo
Me estaba preguntando si existía una herramienta que permita ver los queries que se ejecutan contra la DB cuando se usa SimpleJdbcTemplate en Spring. Y.. existe. Se llama log4jdbc y la instalación es sencillisima.
Una vez instalado, en el log de la aplicación se podrán ver los queries y también el tiempo de ejecución.
( 45728) [http-8400-3 ] INFO select DISTINCT location_code from PURCHASE_LINES where number = 'XXX'
| at net.sf.log4jdbc.Slf4jSpyLogDelegator(Slf4jSpyLogDelegator.java:223) [2011-05-23 21:32:21,341]
( 46995) [http-8400-3 ] INFO select DISTINCT codes from PURCHASE_LINES where po_number = 'XXX'
{executed in 1267 msec} | at net.sf.log4jdbc.Slf4jSpyLogDelegator(Slf4jSpyLogDelegator.java:322) [2011-05-23 21:32:22,608]
( 46997) [http-8400-3 ] INFO 5. ResultSet.new ResultSet returned | at net.sf.log4jdbc.Slf4jSpyLogDelegator(Slf4jSpyLogDelegator.java:158) [2011-05-23 21:32:22,610]
( 46998) [http-8400-3 ] INFO 5. PreparedStatement.executeQuery() returned net.sf.log4jdbc.ResultSetSpy@159d796 | at net.sf.log4jdbc.Slf4jSpyLogDelegator(Slf4jSpyLogDelegator.java:158) [2011-05-23 21:32:22,611]
( 46999) [http-8400-3 ] INFO 5. ResultSet.next() returned true | at net.sf.log4jdbc.Slf4jSpyLogDelegator(Slf4jSpyLogDelegator.java:158) [2011-05-23 21:32:22,612]
( 47000) [http-8400-3 ] INFO 5. ResultSet.getMetaData() returned oracle.jdbc.driver.OracleResultSetMetaData@19e80b1 | at net.sf.log4jdbc.Slf4jSpyLogDelegator(Slf4jSpyLogDelegator.java:158) [2011-05-23 21:32:22,613]
( 47001) [http-8400-3 ] INFO 5. ResultSet.getString(1) returned 10176 KKKKKK | at net.sf.log4jdbc.Slf4jSpyLogDelegator(Slf4jSpyLogDelegator.java:158) [2011-05-23 21:32:22,614]
( 47002) [http-8400-3 ] INFO 5. ResultSet.next() returned true | at net.sf.log4jdbc.Slf4jSpyLogDelegator(Slf4jSpyLogDelegator.java:158) [2011-05-23 21:32:22,615]
( 47003) [http-8400-3 ] INFO 5. ResultSet.getMetaData() returned oracle.jdbc.driver.OracleResultSetMetaData@113126e | at net.sf.log4jdbc.Slf4jSpyLogDelegator(Slf4jSpyLogDelegator.java:158) [2011-05-23 21:32:22,616]
( 47004) [http-8400-3 ] INFO 5. ResultSet.getString(1) returned SSSSSSS | at net.sf.log4jdbc.Slf4jSpyLogDelegator(Slf4jSpyLogDelegator.java:158) [2011-05-23 21:32:22,617]
( 47005) [http-8400-3 ] INFO 5. ResultSet.next() returned true | at net.sf.log4jdbc.Slf4jSpyLogDelegator(Slf4jSpyLogDelegator.java:158) [2011-05-23 21:32:22,618]
Pretty cool, ah?
Una vez instalado, en el log de la aplicación se podrán ver los queries y también el tiempo de ejecución.
| at net.sf.log4jdbc.Slf4jSpyLogDelegator(Slf4jSpyLogDelegator.java:223) [2011-05-23 21:32:21,341]
( 46995) [http-8400-3 ] INFO select DISTINCT codes from PURCHASE_LINES where po_number = 'XXX'
{executed in 1267 msec} | at net.sf.log4jdbc.Slf4jSpyLogDelegator(Slf4jSpyLogDelegator.java:322) [2011-05-23 21:32:22,608]
( 46997) [http-8400-3 ] INFO 5. ResultSet.new ResultSet returned | at net.sf.log4jdbc.Slf4jSpyLogDelegator(Slf4jSpyLogDelegator.java:158) [2011-05-23 21:32:22,610]
( 46998) [http-8400-3 ] INFO 5. PreparedStatement.executeQuery() returned net.sf.log4jdbc.ResultSetSpy@159d796 | at net.sf.log4jdbc.Slf4jSpyLogDelegator(Slf4jSpyLogDelegator.java:158) [2011-05-23 21:32:22,611]
( 46999) [http-8400-3 ] INFO 5. ResultSet.next() returned true | at net.sf.log4jdbc.Slf4jSpyLogDelegator(Slf4jSpyLogDelegator.java:158) [2011-05-23 21:32:22,612]
( 47000) [http-8400-3 ] INFO 5. ResultSet.getMetaData() returned oracle.jdbc.driver.OracleResultSetMetaData@19e80b1 | at net.sf.log4jdbc.Slf4jSpyLogDelegator(Slf4jSpyLogDelegator.java:158) [2011-05-23 21:32:22,613]
( 47001) [http-8400-3 ] INFO 5. ResultSet.getString(1) returned 10176 KKKKKK | at net.sf.log4jdbc.Slf4jSpyLogDelegator(Slf4jSpyLogDelegator.java:158) [2011-05-23 21:32:22,614]
( 47002) [http-8400-3 ] INFO 5. ResultSet.next() returned true | at net.sf.log4jdbc.Slf4jSpyLogDelegator(Slf4jSpyLogDelegator.java:158) [2011-05-23 21:32:22,615]
( 47003) [http-8400-3 ] INFO 5. ResultSet.getMetaData() returned oracle.jdbc.driver.OracleResultSetMetaData@113126e | at net.sf.log4jdbc.Slf4jSpyLogDelegator(Slf4jSpyLogDelegator.java:158) [2011-05-23 21:32:22,616]
( 47004) [http-8400-3 ] INFO 5. ResultSet.getString(1) returned SSSSSSS | at net.sf.log4jdbc.Slf4jSpyLogDelegator(Slf4jSpyLogDelegator.java:158) [2011-05-23 21:32:22,617]
( 47005) [http-8400-3 ] INFO 5. ResultSet.next() returned true | at net.sf.log4jdbc.Slf4jSpyLogDelegator(Slf4jSpyLogDelegator.java:158) [2011-05-23 21:32:22,618]
Pretty cool, ah?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)