The author conflates small outward-facing practices with small inward-facing practices. I don't think they are the same.
Arguing about small outward-facing stuff is just bikeshedding. In the case of the "n/a" versus "ø" debate, you should settle it with an A/B test, some paper mockups, or even just by manager fiat. If a manager's job is not to keep the developers away from unproductive ratholes like this, then what is it?
Arguing about small inward-facing stuff, like house coding style, is about control of one's own environment, and having a pleasant workplace. So it may well be a matter of human dignity and respect to let them spend "useless" time on it.
Honestly I think they are the same in term of impact in the spirit and fun they bring to the workplace. The "n/a" versus "ø" discussion will be settled by me sticking to use "n/a" as it's most commonly understood. No need to A/B test it imho. But that's not the point. My point is that it's not "always" required to crack down on silly discussion. I am not saying you should let your guys spend their day discussing that kind of stuff. I am simply don't kill all the fun as long as product is being shipped.
"Silly" probably wouldn't be the word I'd have chosen, but it's a good point. If I'm building a system, I want it to be quality work, and I don't want the programmer who has to deal with it in 2 years to be cursing my name :). Thus I sometimes become very concerned with things that seem to have "no business impact".
Don't let this be a detriment to the actual business. Your best employees would probably enjoy spending more time on real work and less time 'bikeshedding' [1].
I should have made it clearer that this shouldn't be allowed to individuals not meeting deadlines. That would not make sense. But actually, one of our best employee actually enjoy a little bikeshedding here and there. I blame his young age but it actually bring some fun in when it's most needed. Sometimes you just need to cool down.
A bit of a demeaning way to get the point across, but true nonetheless. If developers don't get the sense of ownership, or at the very least the sense that they influenced the direction of development, then it's a lot harder to get them to stay motivated.
[+] [-] neilk|14 years ago|reply
Arguing about small outward-facing stuff is just bikeshedding. In the case of the "n/a" versus "ø" debate, you should settle it with an A/B test, some paper mockups, or even just by manager fiat. If a manager's job is not to keep the developers away from unproductive ratholes like this, then what is it?
Arguing about small inward-facing stuff, like house coding style, is about control of one's own environment, and having a pleasant workplace. So it may well be a matter of human dignity and respect to let them spend "useless" time on it.
[+] [-] philgo20|14 years ago|reply
Does that make more sense?
[+] [-] jneen|14 years ago|reply
"Silly" probably wouldn't be the word I'd have chosen, but it's a good point. If I'm building a system, I want it to be quality work, and I don't want the programmer who has to deal with it in 2 years to be cursing my name :). Thus I sometimes become very concerned with things that seem to have "no business impact".
[+] [-] philgo20|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lhnz|14 years ago|reply
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/bikeshedding
[+] [-] philgo20|14 years ago|reply
thanks for teaching me a new word ;-)
[+] [-] rheide|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] philgo20|14 years ago|reply