See Software development Management from a joke (strange process, and my 3-point experience)

Viewing software development management from a joke

1. The programmer writes out code that is not considered to be bug free.
2. Software testing, 20 bugs were found.
3. The programmer modified 10 bugs and told the test group that the other 10 was not a bug.
4. The Test team found that 5 of these changes did not work at all and found 15 new bugs.
5. Repeat step 3 and step 4 3 times.
6. In the light of market pressures, the product was finally listed in line with the overly optimistic release schedule that had been developed.
7. The user found 137 new bugs.
8. The programmer who has already won the project bonus doesn't know where to go.
9. The newly formed project team fixed almost all 137 bugs, but found 456 new bugs.
10. Initially the programmer sent a postcard from Fiji to a test group suffering from unpaid wages. The entire Test team resigned collectively.
11. The company was maliciously acquired by the competitor. At the time of acquisition, the final version of the software contains 783 bugs.
12. New CEO. The company hired a new programmer to rewrite the software.
13. The programmer writes out code that is not considered to be bug free.

Such a company, not bankrupt sorry people.

The joke starts with the programmer, and ends with the programmer, not the programmer. But what I want to say is that this is a total failure of the manager, from the whole process, to see no management work. This kind of manager is not only ignorant and incompetent, but also very shameless-the responsibility of his failure to the programmer.

1. What does a programmer have to prove that his code has no bugs? Is there a test case? Do you have code review? The management of this link is missing ( three key: To list the key functions test case, the rest of the bug management, other important functions or technical difficulties should be pre-research, technical experts to develop themselves ).

2. Does the test find bug management? Any trace? This link management is missing.

3. What is the proof that the programmer has modified the 10 bugs? 10 other why not a bug? is the evaluation standard for bugs a programmer? This link management is missing.

4, 5 do not work bug modification question is there any accountability? Adding new bugs is unavoidable in the process of modification, but if there is an effective unit testing mechanism, this can be greatly reduced. This link management is missing.

5, the iteration is normal, but the problem is handled in divergent rather than convergent development, visible no effective management control. This link management is missing.

6. The overly optimistic timetable and the impossibility of reaching the deadline all show the manager's ignorance and incompetence. And in such a case forcibly launched the product, that is ignorant people fearless.

7, this is not responsible for the user, the manager to bear the greatest responsibility.

8, such a situation can also send project bonuses, can only say that managers are not general stupidity.

9, the management work without any improvement, the problem is still in a divergent iterative state. Management is still not in place.

10, the arrears of the test Department of Wages reflects the management of the neglect of quality management and human resources to manage the ignorance.

11. Send the acquirer two words: deserve it. Two words to the purchaser: blind.

12, it can be seen that the new manager and the former manager Dora, have not recognized the root of the problem. But only such managers would make the decision to buy such a company.

13, the repetition of history is inevitable.

A normal business or project, its operation must be carried out in a circular upward. And the job of guaranteeing this kind of operation is management. The main content of management is control, including the rhythm of the control cycle-not too fast nor too slow, control the direction of development-only upward can not downward, control the stability of the operation-not ups and downs or time to gather when scattered.

And all this is not seen in this example.

In this joke example, everything is driven by development work, which is first of all a directional error, the product is to serve the user, of course, should be driven by the user and the market, and combined with their own ability to finalize the focus of the work. This error reflects the fact that managers are not aware of what is being managed and have to be manipulated by more knowledgeable programmers-in effect, they do not know much more than technology.

If a manager doesn't know what he's managing, he can't manage it well.

This is a matter of no doubt, but the domestic software industry always seems to not believe this. One of pernicious influence's deepest lies in the Chinese software industry is:

Managers can only understand the management, do not need to understand technology.
In fact, this is only those ignorant and incompetent unscrupulous managers in order to cheat money and made up, believe that the people will pay the cost of the words.

The second is quality management. Basic Quality Management knowledge tells us that the most serious work before each cycle is to summarize the improvements. Only in this way can we ensure that the circular operation is developed upward rather than out of control. Only effective quality management, can ensure that the iterative process is convergent development, and ultimately achieve the goal. But in this case, this part is obviously missing--although there are testing departments, but their role is only quality control in the inspection link, the management part is still missing.

Then the human resource management. Software development is a labor-intensive work, although it is mental, but also means that people in the factors in which occupy a decisive position. The example of the programmer who did not change the bug to get the project bonuses, and the same hard-working testers are unpaid pay, in addition to show the manager of their work content, and the quality of the work of the non-attention, but also show that managers do not control people, this is a murder team behavior- It is much easier to murder a team than to build.

Finally, the failure of the manager of his experience into this joke, so that you see him by the programmer, how badly, the programmer into a group of crooks. But as long as the management of a simple analysis of the people can be seen, but the ignorance and incompetence of this person caused his present results, and the responsibility of the other people's behavior is to show his shameless.

As a high-ranking manager, if even the responsibility should be shirk, they can be competent for what things.

See Software development Management from a joke (strange process, and my 3-point experience)