Opinion

What does a good scrum master do? Teams private assistent Schedule meetings Work at the team boundary Know the trust level and relationship with the infrastructure team Know the dependencies’ owners relationship level Know the users / depending teams relationship level Help solve conflicts between teams Work on team Build trust Facilitate meetings Alignment Help solve conflicts in the team Dev vs Scrum master Dev = focus, sprint goal Scrum master = improve teamwork

Technique_ Walking Skeleton for incremental development Applying this idea to functionality provided by multiple services. If we know we need to integrate with 3 other services to respond to our request, we should then call actual endpoints with dummy implementations (grab dummy data from their database). The walking skeleton should include the integration (HTTP calls, events, …)

Definition of hate: Model_ Hate is a mirror Something you don’t accept in yourself Something you demonize in others These are the steps (1)You desire something Radiating - Being yourself fully, without having to worry about hurting others’ feelings unintentionally (2)You don’t accept that desire, obligation yourself not to do it, shaming yourself for wanting it Hurting others is bad Hurting others’ feelings is bad Hurting others’ feelings is bad, even if it’s unintentionally I sometimes hurt others I’m a bad person because I sometimes hurt others I’m a bad person because I want to do something that could hurt others feelings (3)So you don’t accept ‘radiating’ in yourself...

There is certainly benefit in re-structuring an organisation. Model_ Conway’s law mentions communication structures in organisations define the resulting architecture of their software Model_ Agile Fluency requires it to reach the third zone “optimizing” So we may want to restructure organisations. But does it have to be “all at once”? “This is the organisation structure we’d like to have.” “After a lot of hard work, we’ve filled in all the boxes with names....

Model_ Agile Fluency = ‘scale out’, making value streams smaller, until they fit into one team. Model_ Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe) = ‘scale up’, adding more people to the same value stream. In Model_ Agile Fluency the distinction is clearly visible when we look through the lens of team composition. Model_ Agile Fluency is scaling out. It creates small teams that are self-sufficient. Slicing the value stream smaller where needed. Changing the organisation’s structure....

When an opinion is expressed strongly, as an absolute I can feel it resonate when it matches my values. or I can feel the friction when it does not. When an opinion is expressed weakly, it’s pretty much useless in this aspect. I think, maybe it would be better if we would try x instead? I won’t get this reaction, or if it does it will be very muted. Another way to hide an opinion is [[model-leading-questions....

I am looking for a job 1. in a growth company (not a company in a declining market) 2. in a team we can grow into a high-performing team 3. where I can apply technical excellence (continuous delivery, devops, agile) 4. practice & learn writing adaptable software (aka ‘agile code’ or ‘maintainable code’) (1) growth company, is what most recruiters know (2) team culture, is what some recruiters partially know (3) technical excellence, is what few if any recruiter knows (4) adaptable code, is what no recruiter knows...

While I was walking this morning, I suddenly connected 2 ideas. Quote_ win a beautiful game Model_ company success = business + technology + personal success To win a beautiful game. That is what I’m looking for in my career. Long-term business success is a beautiful game. And it requires: business success technology success personal success In my career as a software developer, I focus mainly on (2) technology success. That is where many of my quests come from:...

Known cost: extra checking, extra work Hidden cost: no learning, no improvement We can’t know in advance if a potential problem is real or imagined. The only way to know it to not prevent it, and monitor whether it happens. If we always try to solve all potential mistakes before they happen, we will never know which actually happen, and which didn’t. Preventing a potential problem that won’t actually occur, is waste....

Positive discrimination: treat a candidate applying for a role more favourably on the grounds of the nine ‘protected characteristics’ – race, gender, disability, marital status, religion/belief, pregnancy, sexual orientation and gender reassignment (src) Thinking about from a moral standpoint has not been that useful to me. I get caught up in multiple perspectives. “If we don’t, the problem will never go away” “You should judge people based on merit” “It is patronising, implying those people don’t have the skills for the job” “It’s only fair” “It’s the opposite of meritocracy” … And that just causes me to get both judgy and lost....