Category Archives: workbox

Conference submissions – why and how

Recently someone asked me about how to become a conference speaker. I have spoken at conferences, and also served on programme committees, so I hope these thoughts are helpful to you in your quest to speak. Additionally, I been giving feedback to people whose submissions did not make it onto the EuroSTAR programme this year and who asked for feedback, and seen some common themes, including that with over 400 people applying for around 60 speaking places, and an excellent field of submission, many great submissions did not make it to the conference programme… not being selected doesn’t necessarily mean you did a bad submission.

Why speak at a conference?

My first question to you: Why would you want to speak at a conference? It is after all time consuming, stressful, and unlikely to be in the obvious mainstream of your job. Here are some reasons I speak:

  • to improve how I communicate about my subject – a skill for work.
  • to learn my subject: to give the talk, I’ll have to learn more, check facts, build my story.
  • to give back to my industry and educate others, by sharing challenges overcome.
  • for the fun of performing: it’s scary and fun, and a chance to play in public…

So, you want to speak at a conference… what to do? I’m assuming you have a story to tell, one you think is worth other people hearing? If you have not got a story to tell, there is no point speaking…

Don’t wait to be asked…

There are two ways to get a speaking place at a conference: you get invited, or you apply via a “call for submissions” (cfs) or “call for papers” (cfp). However famous you are, you might not get invited, so, if you want to speak at a conference, don’t wait to be invited. Instead, apply to speak. Your submission will be reviewed, and you will be accepted, or rejected. Don’t worry if you are rejected, it has happened to all of us – many times in my case. Conferences often have many more applications than they have speaking places. So review, and try again…

Choose your conference…

First job: decide which conferences you want to speak at, look at their websites to see what dates they run on and what style of submission they want. Look very carefully at any guidelines, themes, and style sheets they suggest. Also look at the websites for previous editions of the conference to see if there is a “house style” the conference favours. Also think about whether you can get to the conference if selected – travel visas, availability, dates and costs – can you go if you are selected, and how will you fund it? Some organisations will support you because they want representation at the conference. Some conferences provide funding towards travel and accommodation. When you are applying look at the balance of benefits and costs. Each of us will have a different view about what we want to do, what cost/benefit we need to make it worthwhile.

Investigate what information the cfp requires

Look at the session options offered carefully. Think about what they want for different types of session. Typically the minimum you will be asked for along with contact details is:

  • A title
  • An abstract
  • Your biography

You may be asked for a paper to explain your idea. You may be asked for key learning points, takeaways, what type of session this is, what type of audience it is aimed at, your speaking experience, evidence in the form of supporting documents, videos… it all depends on the conference.

What helps your submission succeed?

Factors that will help your submission for many industry conferences include:

  • telling a really good story – something compelling, coherent, concise, and which flows from the title, into the abstract and through to any takeaways.
  • focusing on your experiences of your projects – things where you are demonstrating your involvement, challenges you have faced and overcome, mistakes you have made and learnt from – rather than using your abstract to regurgitate theory.
  • having a new perspective to offer, something that has not been offered at this conference before.

If you don’t have speaking experience, think about getting mentoring – within your local/national industry communities, within your organisation, or via the conferences. You could look at SpeakingEasy for example ( https://speaking-easy.com/ ). Also look for opportunities to speak at local meet ups and national conferences before going for the larger international conferences. It’s likely that fewer people will apply and this increases your chances of being selected.

Conferences will often have themes that change year to year. Many conferences in addition are looking for speakers and sessions that increase the diversity of ideas and people, improve inclusiveness, are engaging, participative and interactive, allowing the audience to not just listen but also take part.

Do…

  • Have your own compelling story
  • About something unique, transformational
  • About overcoming challenges
  • Provide evidence!
  • Keep it coherent, well focused
  • Keep it clean…
  • Ask for help!
  • Get it reviewed
  • Get it proof read
  • Speak at smaller events first…
  • Ask for feedback

What to avoid

Don’t just send the same abstract to different conferences – they each want something different. Don’t send the same abstract several times to the same conference for different session types – it just annoys the programme committee. Don’t send an excessive number of submissions – it is better to have one really well thought out abstract.

Don’t…

  • Forget to spellcheck
  • Forget to tell your story
  • Present no evidence
  • Use bad language
  • Assume we know who you are
  • Ignore the conference style
  • Forget to ask for time off…
  • Expect to get in … necessarily

Useful links

Here are some useful other blogs and links…

Rob Lambert’s “Blazingly simple guide…”: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/blazingly-simple-guide-submitting-conferences-rob-lambert/

Steve Watkins’ “How to prepare…” https://stevethedoc.wordpress.com/2019/05/20/how-to-prepare-your-first-conference-talk-1-getting-started/

SpeakingEasy: https://speaking-easy.com/

Good luck!

and give it a go – you won’t get in unless you try!

Advertisements

CHIIR Conference Glasgow March 2019: Tutorial report

This was my first time at CHIIR, and it was a really enjoyable experience; lovely people, great community spirit and the sessions were full of information and discussion. I started with the Tutorial on Sunday 10th March “Coding qualitative data: you asked them, now what to do with what they said” led by Dr Rebekah Willson (University of Strathclyde). There is a pleasure in being taught by a good teacher who enjoys their subject, even if the subject is not one of direct interest. As it happens, the subject for this tutorial was right on topic for me, right now, so a double pleasure. A really good session, which Dr Willson described as a “whirlwind tour”, but in fact gave space for us to work in pairs on an exercise, discuss and feedback. I’ve come away from that tutorial feeling more confident that I can code up the qualitative data I have collected so far in my studies.

We covered a step by step approach to coding qualitative data, bearing in mind the “paradigm shift in thinking” as one moves from quantitative to qualitative methods: we’re dealing with the human and that is messy, challenging, based on experiences and beliefs, and allows a broader, holistic understanding, albeit one that is constructionist, with the researcher involved in the research, giving multiple meanings, multiple interpretations. We are there, we are part of the process, so we have to think about the role we have and what we are doing. The result of qualitative data collection is richer data that is more difficult to interpret. We are asking “Why did they do/say that?” There are several approaches to coding, and so it is important to choose one and stick with it. There are challenges of qualitative research being in itself a learning process – it is messy, it is fun, and doing it shows you how to do it. It is normal to be confused and overwhelmed. That’s a helpful thought. Dr Willson chose to show us one route through, with a series of iterating steps, providing a robust and rigorous approach to analysing qualitative data. She reminded us that a negative/opposing result can often be the most useful and interesting thing to explore – why is that case different? It is about following where the data leads, and moving from the concrete to the abstract. Looking for similarities, grouping and classifying. She talked about the process feeling uncomfortable, which I find to be true – like wandering in a fog and occasionally glimpsing the light!

When we gather data for a qualitative study, we usually have a vast volume of material – for a example, transcribing an interview can give you 1000’s of words of material. Furthermore, when you ask open questions, the answers are unpredictable and often richer than you’d anticipated. This fits with what’s happening for me. Instead of asking “what is your job title?” and “what is your education?” in a recent survey, because of a limit on the number of questions – I combined the two into “Tell me a bit about yourself” and received back long essays that told me such a variety of things, and sparked so many questions that I had not thought to ask, around ideas that I now see are interesting to explore… Dr Willson said we must pay attention to anything that is potentially interesting, code it up and then refine our ideas – grouping, splitting up, asking new questions of the data, all the time moving from a broad view of the data to a deeper focus. Also, be rigorous and trustworthy – sharing how we code the data, what steps we took, taking an iterative approach, triangulating across data sources, including negative examples, making our codebook available, making our inclusion/exclusions available. The researcher must be trustworthy, and if more than one persons is coding – this is a good thing to check for consistency of interpretation, provided that there is inter-coder reliability; we need clear codes, clear reasons for using the codes, clear inclusion and exclusion criteria. This means we’ve moved from the initial coding exercise to a focused coding stage, using a code book. The coders code separately and then compare results.

Dr Willson described several methodologies for qualitative analysis, and explained that the choice of methology is affected by the research questions. The methodology she showed us in detail, and which we practised in the exercises is Thematic Analysis. She talked about two levels of engaging with the data: the SEMANTIC level where we look for and code things that are expliciit in the data, and the LATENT level where we look ideas and assumptions implicit in the data. We need to decide ahead of time which we do. In thinking about these levels, we start to realsie that what people say and what they do can be different – so field notes about behaviour become part of the data. As well as text, we might collect and analyse video, audio, images and so on. The steps in thematic analysis are:

  1. familiarise – read the text several times and take notes. Do it line by line!
  2. generate initial codes, get to know the data – again line by line.
  3. start to look for patterns in the codes, perhaps ways they group
  4. make themes of one or more codes – overarching ideas that cut across the codes.
  5. review the themes against the data… do they make sense?
  6. and do it again…

Defining and naming the themes provides the analytic power – think about what the thme can contribute. Themes can have subthemes, so there can be a hierarchy of themes, subthemes, categories, and codes. The code book has the full description of these, and each code and theme has a single word or short phrase descriptive name. Relate the codes and themes back to the research questions. As this process is worked through, the research questions might change – because we realise the data is pointing us in a new direction. We need durign research to constantly revist our questions, out data, our themes and codes t ensure we are following the data, asking the right questions, revisiting, enlarging and clarifying, all the time. Whether we start from a deductive approach (where we predefine the codes to support our idea and the questions we want to explore) or an inductive approach (where we explore the data, come up with codes and build to themes and questions) or move between the two – always we need to keep revisiting the data. Follow up, change the questions, revisit ideas, identify what is different, look for variations…

Later in the week, the conference dinner was at the Science Museum, and while there I noticed a mural/display that said “We are all scientists; we all observe, find reasons, look for relationships, categorise and make models” Unfortunately my photo of it is too blurry to share… but it summarised the tutorial and the week for me. Thank you, Dr Willson for a brilliant tutorial!

Conferences 2018 – a reflection

It’s been a busy year for conferences and teaching – so here is a quick summary…

UKSTAR 2018

This was in London, UK, in March.

I enjoyed day 1, with excellent keynotes from Christina Ohanian, and Gustav Kuhn. Christina’s messages on building teams were full of insights. As well as Gustav’s keynote, I’d also enjoyed Gustav’s workshop with Alan Richardson. The application of magic to psychology and then to how we observe (or don’t observe) the phenomena about us was very revealing, and certainly applicable to testers. Do we see the things other people don’t see? Can we be tricked? Powerful stuff.

Day 2 of UKSTAR 2018 was a very – extreme – experience for me. I was booked to present the opening keynote and then a workshop, and just before I was due to go on stage I had a completely unexpected phone call to say my mother had died. I made the decision that I wanted to go ahead – she would have wanted and expected that – discussed it with the programme committee and the UKSTAR team, and with their full and immense support went ahead to give my keynote – on Leadership, Followership and Fellowship – which went well, on a surge of adrenlin that also carried me through my workshop where we shared information around the UX of testing tools for testers – contributing data to my research and allowing delegates to share experiences and learn some UX techniques to apply to their own test tool acquisitions.

I used the data I collected during the workshop as one of the inputs to the Webinar I did for EuroSTAR, which also allowed me to open an online survey, and collect more data. The webinar and survey are still available here: https://huddle.eurostarsoftwaretesting.com/webinar-questionnaire-no-shelfware-lets-drive/

Thank you so much EuroSTAR and UKSTAR teams for your support during UKSTAR and beyond!

Romanian Code Camp

This was in Iasi in March. I was so pleased (given my personal circumstances) to be there with my friend and colleague Sue Atkins. Again the conference organisers were so supportive! As well as a masterclass on quality in use and UX, and a masterclass on Leadership, Followership and Fellowship, I presented on Human Factors for Test Automation, Sue and I presented a joint session on State Transition Testing, and also we both gave lightning talks. I was delighted to meet Vijay Kiran, who gave an inspirational lightning key on the importance of ethics in development – that excellent software is not just well engineered, not just exhibiting excellent UX, but also is ethically sound – doing good. I’ve been quoting him all year since! It was enjoyable to be at a conference with a range of tracks as well as a testing track: architecture, design, frontend, web, IoT, engineering, leadership, agile, entrepreneurship, and – my favourote track title – “funa dn fearless”. This conference was also beautifully hosted, ending with a cocktail party for speakers, hand made, natural ingredients – and the most delicious non-alcoholic one featuring apples and peanuts! I wish I could remember the name of the people who produced them!

STAREAST

STAREAST is always good fun, and this year was no exception…  I presented two tutorials: “Influence Diagrams – a new way to understand testing” and “Transforming Testing: building your road map”. These were both half day workshops, although closely linked together. I also presented a track on “Devices and Desires” about our attitude to technology and how that matches against the needs and desires of people outside IT. An interesting couch discussion with a group of delegates about leadership completed my contributions to the conference. Photo:  https://stareast.techwell.com/conference-photo/se18-couch-session-isabel-evans

While there, I enjoyed the Women Who Test day; each time I attend I learn something new about myself, and enjoy the perspectives of the other attendees (men and women are welcome, by the way).

HTB Workshop and HUSTEF preparation

During 2018, I was honoured to be the HUSTEF Programme Chair. More on the latter later! In June, while in Budapest for the programme planning meeting, I also presented a workshop for the HTB on Quality in Use, and at the Tezst and Tea meet up presented “No more shelfware!”

The programme planning went well, it was a real joy to work with the programme committee and the HUSTEF organising team!

BCS SIGiST

This meeting took place in London in June. Stuart Reid and the committee had organised an “all keynotes” day, which was really good fun. I met up with old friends, and enjoyed their talks, as well as presenting “Devices and Desires” to an appreciative audience.

ODIN

Off to Oslo in September for a delightful conference, I gave tutorials on UX, and on Human Factors for test automatio, as well as a keynote on Leadership. At ODIN I also met up with Lorraine and Siobhan of the EuroSTAR team, who took me aside for a coffee, a catch up… and an interesting request…

TESTJAM

Straight from Oslo to Utrecht, where I presented at Capgemini’s Testjam, on Devices and Desires, and met up with old friends (Nathalie and Kimberley and Rik) from Capgemini… A lovely evening, ending with a dash to the airport as storms disrupted air travel… 

STARWEST and STARCANADA

Before STARWEST, the various personal events of the year meant that I could get to conferences and deliver, but was unable to take in any information! By STARWEST and STARCANADA, I felt more settled, and enjoyed listening to the keynotes and tracks. STARWEST was busy busy busy and great fun!

Across the two conferences, I taught 5 tutorials (test design, requirements testing, UX, influence diagrams, automation: a human-centred approach) which all went well plus a lightning key, 2 track sessions, 2 couch sessions, and a talk on failure at Women Who Test.

I’d also been on the programme committee with Rob Sabourin (the chair) and Julie Gardiner. That had been a really interesting experience, and I was delighted to have the chance to contribute, and to help choose the speakers. My feel is that these were two great programmes – but that of course is author bias!

Great keynotes! Jennifer Bonine and Janna Loeffler on story telling – great production values, wonderful illustrations by a Disney illustrator, and a great message well delivered. Jon Bach’s courageous use of a live survey with the audience via an app was really enjoyable, as well as his thoughts on how one’s behaviour changes with one’s role. Dona Sarkar on “be the lord of your own rings” was a fireball of energy. Max Saperstone showed a brilliant use of mutation syntax testing. Fiona Charles discussed leadership and how it differs from Management. Alexandre Baudin showed us how to test flight simulators, and Sophie Benjamin eloquently told how to transform testing.

Among the tracks I enjoyed Jane Jeffers from Riot Games on asking Why, and Julene Johnson from Lucid Software on Anxiety. ALso Stefan Marceau and Keith Turpin on User Stories, Fiona Charles on Gaining Consciousness, 

Women Who Test maintained its celebratory nature, in particular from a rich day, I’ll pick out getting to see the first printing of Tania Katan’s book on creative trespassing…

HUSTEF

My first big conference as programme chair! It’s been hard work, but what an experience! I am so pleased to have done this… In fact, I think it deserves a separate post…

EuroSTAR

The final conference of the year… and as always like coming home. Old friends abound, so many greetings, embraces, and conversations! Friends from all over the world! 

I think this one deserves its own post too – lots to say, and this post is already…. too long!

2017 – a year of challenges and change

I’ve spent a short time the last couple of days reflecting on my 2017, it has been a challenging year, full of change and disruption, but also progress and successes. This is true personally and professionally, and now as never before I find those merging, affecting each other, blending. I’ll talk more in my storytelling blog about those areas.

This is a brief summary, just of the professional areas:

Work projects: This year, I have been involved in 3 work projects, each quite different roles, and for 3 different client companies based in different countries: one in the UK, one elsewhere in the EU, and one in Asia. Each of these projects challenged me in a different way – challenges of culture, language as well as challenges to be creative and imaginative, to meet deadlines while ensuring quality standards were maintained for both the deliverables I was responsible for and the services I provided. A mix of consultancy, training, mentoring, coaching, writing, and diagramming.

Conferences: in 2017, I participated at 12 conferences – including keynotes, tutorials, panels, workshops, track sessions, one-to-ones, “on the couch” sessions, discussions, where I made new friends, met old friends, and topped off the year by the award of the EuroSTAR Testing Excellence Award. Thank you to everyone who contributed to making that happen – I am so proud and pleased!

Research: also this year, I applied to University of Malta, and have been accepted as a post graduate student, so finally after much dithering, discussion and worry, I have started my research. So far I have taken and passed modules on “how to” research – quantitative and qualitative methods. I’ve also started to read academic literature about the research topic (UX of testing tools) and to make a research design. That’s taken 6 months!

I’m learning how to do this, and as I allowed myself to reset to a “beginner” it opened my mind both to how much I know and how little I know – as thought I have been sitting in the centre of my own paradox. I’ve always done CPD (Continuous Professional Development) and I have always seen life-long learning as essential, but I’ve seen this in a new and refreshing way. Being more open to many new ideas (not just in the professional arena, but personally too) is feeding my ability to relinquish the burden of imposter syndrome and of inflated expectation. I am more balanced.

There are nuances in all this, detail that I don’t want to share online – yet – even though I am sure almost no-one reads these posts!

The award citation for EuroSTAR provided me with a career retrospective from the point of view of my colleagues in the industry. This is a wake up call to what I have achieved and am capable of. That, plus the process of doing a personal annual retrospective has been good, and has additionally made me realise that I have – somehow, at some point – let go of the weekly retrospective that was for so many decades the anchor for my professional self. Something to reinstate for 2018.

2017 – a year of change, challenge and success for my professional life. Now to planning 2018 – what do I want to achieve? What is possible? What do I dream of?

Book review: A practical guide to Testing in DevOps (Katrina Clokie) – get it, read it!

Headline: get this book! read this book! Link: https://leanpub.com/testingindevops

Katrina Clokie’s book “A practical guide to Testing in DevOps” is a “must read”, and not just if you are a tester encountering DevOps. As Katrina says in the preface: “This book is for testers who want to understand DevOps and what it means for their role. It’s also for people in other roles who want to know more about how testing fits into a DevOps model.” It is engaging, informative, full of useful examples, case studies and evidence, and gives pragmatic, thoughtful guidance that encourages us – the readers – to use the information provided to craft our own approach based on our own circumstances.

I’m particularly pleased with three of Katrina’s themes:

  • this is about people as well as technology – how people engage, communicate, cooperate, solve problems, achieve goals – together;
  • separating the activity of testing from the role “tester” – the activity is needed, the role may change;
  • the purpose of testing is to contributing to our shared understanding of, and delivery of, what our stakeholders, customers, users, colleagues require from IT: a subtle and changing mix of speed, predictability, quality and a great user experience.

I kept finding points in the book that are applicable for any project, any organisation. There are useful ideas in this book if you are working in a DevOps environment, of course, but I believe you will also find it a source of useful ideas and techniques what ever your project methodology. Katrina provides chances for all of us to review our current position, and just shake it up a little, to see if we can improve. For each of us, for each organisation, team, what we need to do is different. Katrina is rightly emphatic that there is not one right answer, instead she provides aides to thinking, communicating, problem solving.

I really like the way Katrina references and quotes so many colleagues across the industry – this really helps build the feeling of a community working together, sharing ideas, not always agreeing, but debating openly and constructively.

She encourages us to try ideas and propose changes on a small, experimental scale if we or our colleagues are nervous “…spend an hour to give something new a try…”

After an introduction to the concept of DevOps, the book is divided into six main sections:

  • Testing in a DevOps Culture;
  • Testing in Development;
  • Testing in Production;
  • Testing in DevOps Environments;
  • Industry Examples;
  • Test Strategy in DevOps.

I was pulled into the book straight away. Highlights for me in the first section are:

  • visualising the test strategy – what we think we are doing, what we are actually doing… and what we should be doing. Newsflash: get the people without “tester” in their job title to do the discussions, and as the “tester” listen, facilitate… and allow the others to challenge your assumptions!
  • blazing a trail – really good ideas, hints and tips for building meaningful multi-way conversations where we listen as well as speaking… Forging the pathways between groups, teams and individuals, and reinforcing those pathways by rich rather than fast communication.

I have made so many notes and comments, just on that first section – it sparked many useful ideas, reinforced some thoughts, and provided me with new tricks, tips and tools that I shall try out.

In the second, third and fourth sections, Katrina provides examples and evidence for how testing – the activity – takes place successfully outside Testing – the team or Testing – the life cycle phase. This is such a refreshing read; my own experience since I started in IT is that good, productive, thoughtful testing can be done by people other than testers, and during activities not called testing. Developers, Ops folk, Support teams, Sales, Marketing – many people in an organisation can do good testing, often with a focus that the “Tester” may miss.  She discusses the advantages and risks of testing in development, production and DevOps environments, showing options for how risks can be mitigated, whether by use of tools, experimentation, exploration, group activities, process changes, shifting left and/or shifting right.. I’m not going to share too much here, just encourage you to buy and read the book!

The fifth section, the industry examples, is useful because it provides a wide range of approaches. Not all of us will find the same approach appropriate; something essential to success in one organisation may be damaging in another. There is a good mix of methods, tools, approaches, and types of testing covered, in this section and in the others, so you should find something to use as a starting point for making your own model.

By the time I reached the last section of the book, I had a mass of ideas, notes, and things to follow up, and I would be surprised if you did not feel the same way.

In the final section, Katrina brings everything together to help you define your own strategy for testing DevOps. Your’s will be different. It will be the strategy that is right for your team, your organisation. In this section she helps us to think about our organisation’s appetite for risk: I also have found this to be extremely useful point to consider and discuss. Are my stakeholders risk averse, or risk takers? Am I aligned with them? At this point, should I challenge or support their stance? Katrina provides useful examples of the type of question to ask in order to understand appetite for risk, identify which risks are of importance, and from that decide what activities will mitigate the risk. Those activities might include testing – the activity – but there will very likely be other activities that will mitigate the risks just as well.  From this we can draw up a strategy for testing, acknowledging that it is part of but not all of the activity required to provide our stakeholders with the quality, speed, predictability, risk mitigation and so on that is right for their circumstances.

Whether you are working waterfall, V-model, W-model, Iterative, agile or DevOps – you’ll find some useful ideas in this book.

A good ending to an excellent book, which I have no hesitation in recommending. Thank you Katrina!

 

Book recommendation: “Creating great teams” by Mamoli and Mole

Here is a new, interesting, informative and easy to read book on forming teams. “Creating Great Teams: how self selection lets people excel” by Sandy Mamoli and David Mole takes the reader step by step through the process of building teams by enabling them to self-select.

This book is based on the “belief that people are at their happiest and most productive if they can choose what they work on and who they work with” – an appealing theory, but does it work in practice? The authors do not just present a theoretical construct, they describe a case study of an organisation where they were successful in implementing the self-selected teams method, and they discuss their fears, problems and blockers honestly, showing how they overcame obstacles. The refer to other organisations that have used the method, and provide qualitative and quantitative evidence in terms of anecdotes, results of staff surveys and company results.

The book is divided into short chapters, starting with an explanation of the ideas, then step by step through planning and preparing for self selection, the self-selection workshop, and importantly, the followup required to implement, launch and support the new teams. Each chapter provides checklists, guidelines, hints and tips, and practical experiences.

So – what is self-selection? When teams self select, instead of managers assigning people to teams, the teams choose themselves. Given the projects that are required, the people within the organisation choose which project they want to work on.

I was lucky enough to meet Sandy at Agile India 2017, and when she described the method to me I was excited by the concept, but at first sceptical. I could see problems: what if there were project no-one wanted to do? What if everyone wanted to work on the same project? What if there were people no-one wanted in their team – wouldn’t it all be a bit like sports lessons at school (where I was always chosen last…)? Sandy & David show in this book that they faced the same doubts, and they show how to overcome them. Happily, rational, intelligent adults react well to responsibility and choice.

In this review, I will not go into detail about the methods they use and the checklists they provide. I urge you to buy the book! It is really good value and will make you think anew about how you build teams.

ISBN 978 1 68050 128 5

https://pragprog.com/book/mmteams/creating-great-teams

Get it, read it, think about it, notice the effectiveness of the working method.

Quilting and hacking

Two blogs to which I subscribe had new posts this week, and they just fitted together:

Now I know sometimes I can be a little obsessive about the analogy between sewing and IT; the need for a workbox, the need for new ways of using old methods, the way the projects are similar… but I urge you to read them both and compare.

A project works when you understand the materials you are working with, how they fit together, and how you can modify them. Repurposing happens with fabric and with code. Hacking can be a good thing – with code and with fabric. But you need to understand the pillars for success. The Googletesting blog suggests to me:

  • refactoring old code so you can reuse it
  • consistent formatting giving patterns that you can follow and
  • use of structure and architecture to hold everything together

Knitnkwilt suggests to me

  • working with what you have got by reusing/repurposing old things
  • using a consistent pattern framework to hold the design together and
  • enhancing the old with new structure/fabric.