Liu Tianbei
People: Productive Projects and Teams, 2nd Edition, by Tom Demarco and Timothy Lister, 1999, Dorset House, 245ppil Nome Della Rosa Name, Mysticals believe that there is an intrinsic rather than things . It is easy to make this in "reality" - calling Mark's not necessarily a battle, called EMMA's not necessarily advice. For books, it is even more such: Ovid and Kafka's masterpiece have in except for "Metamorphoses and Die Verwandlung in Chinese), there is not much more than" modified "in Chinese. share it. But the mysterists can still take a book as example: "People" (Chinese "person") The name seems to have some other part of the book, like the sand, which is hidden in the whole world. Of course, I don't just contain "people" and "software" in the title, although we can infer the core arguments in the book: Software development, return to the roots or " The factors of people "dominate, so the success or failure of the project is lost, and the survival of the company is not in technology, but" people ", or the level of emphasis on people's factors, organizational methods, etc. In other words, the main purpose of this book can be derived from the "analysis site" in this title (this word is meaningful to the Germans), but I refer to, more is a contradiction included in this title, but I seem to be effectively pushed effectively, and it is inherently subverting the discussion of the book. In the corner of my study, "PeopleWare" shares the location and other original "technical books".尴尬, first disclose from the title, this self-cultivation method is in a large number of "pattern" "Models" and "Components" are suspicious, loneliness, lack of "technical features". This dish and soft fighting between People and Software, with obvious "Brainstorm" traces (you can also find other examples in the book, such as "Teamcide"). Generally speaking, similar expressions should be produced by a person ("Market Personnel"), another person ("management class") consumption, and "technology" has nothing to do. - and slow, take a closer look: "Productive Projects and teams" - this seems to be some involved with "we"? In any case, "Project" and "productivity" have been considered to be related to "technology" in the software industry, similar practices are more than "technology" one end in vocabulary spectroscopy, not "administrative" or broad " management".
Leafy face
And if you open this book, start reading a few pages from casual places, your reaction may prove which kind of person you are. It may be that this book is too "easy" to read it. It is soft and soft, and the entrance is instant. However, like the cough syrup is a good medicine for some people. Like most people, I expect that all people can smoothly receive such information in this way: the chart is hand-painted; from time to time Abstract "Style of the styles; obenced expression and the sturdy pen; Finally, it is the lack of technical details and the common sense of common sense (EG page 186 mention" ... building perl applets at yahoo "). This is a dilbert reading (unfortunately lacking Dilbert's cold and subtle). If you (like me at first read), I believe this is a "Software Engineering Book", especially where it is designed to find a working method, then maybe you will call when you read. This style is not (like I have thought that it can be explained by the technical background of the people. Among the two authors, although there was no trace of software development on the Lister resume, Demarco did serve in Bell Lab, and even wrote a book on structured software analysis (Structure, 1979). ). It is said that "data flow map (DFD)" from the previous (object-oriented introduced) is the invention of the book. Therefore, the sweet style that is not necessarily a shortage of lack (knowledge or ability, such as), but the authors are interested in: this is the imitation of the salesman style, and the consumption of the target The group, like you have already guessed, is the so-called "management". One of my reads (obviously a tendency) book review, "I strongly recommend this book to everyone, from low-level engineers to CEO", another harmful recommendation: "I strongly recommend you to buy A boss gives you or your boss, if you are a boss, buy one for everyone in your department, and buy a copy to yourself, seemed what nutrition or special medicine. Here, I (humble) recommend a rearway, if your boss has not read, you must not read unless you happen to try your work (whose reason is detailed). However, the above distinction is still too naive, even, this book itself resists this distinction. The correct point of the book, the management personnel developed by software is often the "technical" person. So they seem to tend to be technically, rather than "human gentle" consideration: Whether it is a project, a team, or a business. The above arguments should be said to be the main achievement of this book. It depicts (although it is a comic type, despite the blurred cross-blur) a role, "management" and "technician", "administrative bureaucrat" and "madman programmer "Between," transform "but old habit changes, it is not a group of people who are not as if they are not right. It tried to capture this floating shadow, giving this role positioning for this no discretion, and issues a diagnosis certificate (in my opinion). If there is no original book in your hand, you can go to the Amazon website to see the cover of the book: a green water powder painted on the white, a large number of blurred leaves, vague showing a face.
My (lossless) assumption is: This face is a portrait of "Software Development Manager" mentioned above. A lot of views in the book, the original reader group may be the top-level decision maker, but due to the time of proposal, it is not compromised by the conflict destination we talk about independently. But maybe for the young software industry, this face is hidden behind the image, or an over-inconsistentant man, very few people can feel comfortable in front of it, to speak on it, it is a specialized knowledge. In a person concern, I feel that the author of this book has not grasped the tone: they seem to work hard, do not teach, but the result is sad to slide the other style, in German (and later English), It is called Kitsch, which refers to a rustic-brought rustic to the elegance - some of the paragraphs of "The Eternal Tao" of the "Office Space" have increased this effect. However, if only the "business people" that have been caught in the software development industry, this book does provide a near ideal starting point. The various features mentioned above ensure that it has a rare capture effect on a hurry. Software company's paradox
In my opinion, the tension of this book (derived from the title) is composed of two sets of almost orthogonal opposites. The first is the identity contradiction of the "Software Development Manager" mentioned above. Second, it is the "Software Enterprise" itself implies the paradox. According to this book, software companies seem to be particularly inclined to understand itself. For example, (seems to be a component of software), managers always think that developers are uniform, alternative;, for example, managers are also intended to think that the organization of the development project is more technical Question, but have nothing to do with "personnel". The above two kinds of understanding seem to be considered that the software industry has been separated from various traditional enterprises, only mechanical, or at least technical management ideas can be successful. In this regard, the authors argue: software production, as a human activity, facing the main problems is not technical, but the Sociology. Software developers are not alternative to the non-faceless labor like mechanical components, but the flesh. We should not be confused by the so-called "high-tech" appearance. It is wrong to make ordinary management models in software. Because (according to the authors), the invention is indeed a high-tech field that is a habitat that is a peerless genius, but most of the number of software companies is only in the "application" of others. This kind of application is usually unlike other human practice. In this way, it seems that software companies will also need to manage science and organization skills with other industries, and need to deal with a large number of "people" issues. So how do the special places of this book reflect? Why not end after completing the above demonstration, and recommend a "management introduction"? Here, the authors introduce additional views: software companies have their own qualities, especially the software development process itself has its own characteristics. Managers tend to be easy to fall into the circle of it. They (mistake) believe that the developers are more and better, the better, the better, the developers are like they don't care about the phone, the developers are only sitting as other employees (such as marketing, customer service staff). , Work from the lattice segmentation, the developer does not care about the quality of the product. And (the authors put forward) facts are: pressure and overtime can only destroy project progress; due to the specialty of software development, we should try to ensure that developers are not disturbed and have enough space; developers are most concerned about the quality of products, and even dependent For the great matter of honor. If the above report is true, then we seem to have to re-establish a myth of software development, the software industry seems to be re-abiding with all other industries, and sentenced to the cloud mud. However, just like the amount of information conveyed in photography, the amount of information conveyed almost the same, and putting a completely wrong practice is not necessarily correct. For example, I can't see the "unique features" of the authors that advocate the software industry, which is not available for other industries, such as architects. If this argument is correct, you may be able to replace the same text in accordance with a specific vocabulary, and then launch a new book "peopletecture"? Perhaps, the software industry has still stayed in a childish stage. In which region, which practice, software industry is different from the "traditional industry", and what are we should still maintain loyalty to "human activities"? This kind of similar / difference, plus the confusion of "who is managing" mentioned above, forming a secret vortex that promotes and swallow the theme. As a victim, the authors did not allow them to see the (horrible and magnificent) picture in the center of the swirl.
Menschliches, Allzumenschliches (humanity, too human)
I am afraid I have given the impression of "the enemy of this book". As the recovery and compensation, I should show that I agree with the vast majority of concrete conclusions. The conscience of surviving developers in my body told me that the authors of the authors about problems such as overtime, telephone, space and separation are right. I especially liked to emphasize the status of the developer "IMMersion": Any programmer wants to enter the state of "productivity", there is a slow process (usually more than 15 minutes). After entering this state, he / she will feel specially attended, and the labor efficiency is extremely high. Therefore, as a leader, for the maximization of profits, managers should also promote as much as possible, rather than destroying this state. Try to disturb the developers; try to arrange the same project group in the closed, enough space; try to avoid calls in such an office (using email, even voice mail); try to be clear as possible (this may be I added, because the same person has different responsibilities means he wants to switch in a variety of contemplations). Although the concept of "meditation" here is similar to dreams, these do not mean my mythical software development process, because we can of course say the same thing about architects. And if we ignore this creative worker (or use a famous contradictory rhetoric, "mental workers"?) The meditation required for "mental workers" will often be eroded by the 8-hour labor time (consider, if You have woken up and have been awakened, a few times, and a night's sleep is destroyed). This will bring two questions: managers have saved their expenditures in the details of office space, but ignore the maximum expenditure of their payments (labor remuneration); more than this is that the company flows "Can't do anything between 9 to 5 o'clock, and this will lead to overtime-separation of vicious circle. There are still many similar exciting arguments. If you are a manager, especially if you are not familiar with the software development process, then it is really necessary to seriously appreciate these precious thinking. I think, the core means to disperse a illusion: If your subordinates like their work, then don't mean that your work has a problem or the efficiency of the company is reduced; it is often a business enterprise entering a conscience cycle Sign. And if you save (how many ignorant moves in this name) or other ridiculous reasons (the examples in the book are "this appearance is not professional"), the employees have caused interference, hurt, restrictions, and restrictions, then the final result is only It can be morale low, the efficiency is low, the leaving rate is high, and brief: disaster. Yes, humanity, too human sex. All recommendations, including the proposed tone, contain this "humanity" consideration. There is no wonder some book review, this book is "Humanism". Here, human nature is just because of the mediocrity of self-injection or a harained manager (you have seen the corner of Dilbert's upper bureau, the interests of labor and capital are originally consistent, as long as Huang Laozhi, employee The enthusiasm will be mobilized, and everything will enter a benign circulation. The book is especially reflected in the discussion of Teamwork and Quality. According to the authors, the most important way to increase productivity is to form an effective team. However, the formation of teams, including high quality, no need to achieve significant administrative intervention. For example, the slogan of "we want is high quality" is helpless to truly reach this goal.
It is said that developers will come to the team to work together to pursue teamwork, pursue high quality, so it is not as high as an external force, so that the team "growth" is so promptly, and if the construction is reasonable, the pride of developers will not allow any less than Products (often higher than managers) are released. Similar league spreads in the ear. If you think this is incredible, the author will take a series of "hard data" to talk: they have been operating a coding exercise for actual enterprises ("Coding War Game") test. The above views have been confirmed by these tests. These tests have been systematically analyzed in the previous article (Programmer Performance and The Effects of the Workspace, 1985) and have got a more serious conclusion. Although I am willing to sympathize with all such discussion, it is like the photographic metaphor mentioned above, the front is not more information than the negative film. The failure of "Devil" boss has not proved that the "Angel" boss will be successful. Simply reversed the practice of the former, most of them brought more than a disaster. For example, compared to the emphasis on individual feelings and comfort, the team's formation is more dependent on good communication, selfless mutual assistance, and the personality factors of core members. Simply focusing on "human nature", it is not necessarily to form a team, just like a single list is not necessarily ruined the team. I have an opposition to similar speech (or "more" better) may be more "metaphysics" rather than "reason". "People", this "humanitarian" resorted to the ultimate object, and finally a abstraction that was sent too many emotional factors. We heard that it was mentioned by the authors who had a much feeling, but it was really like the core development of the software. Does people are not defined by a particular process it is involved (just like the love definition, the team member is defined by the team)? As far as "core", "people" should not be more humble? Unless we are satisfied with a thinking of a "business operation" (there, one side, rough and even slight self-intoxication is the necessary strategy), just a "person" word does not mean the final answer. My feeling is that compared with "Moon Myth", this book is in many details, and it is not possible to give effective ways (for example, "Surgery Team" in "Moon Myth" is B. The team in the book is more operability), which may still be related to the readers of the book: Again, this is a book prepared for those who love the "brain storm" and behave in specific operations. It is committed to referring to some illusion, reversing certain attitudes. If you happen to the author's idea, and go in the appropriate direction, as an attentive waiter, it will open a specific door for you. But it seems that it should not be expected, it can lead you home all the way. Reference * The Mythical Man-Month: Essays on Software Engineering, Anniversary Edition (2nd Edition) by Frederick P. Brooks, 1995 Addison-Wesley
