This blog post is all about ... designing nuclear power-plants, insatiable desire to put CQRS, eventsourcing & microservices in every software product, engineers' maturity, what's more important: problems or solutions & how JIRA can help (yikes!).
There are some terms in IT you'll probably never learn at any CS University course. Yet, they are too important to omit & one of them is "bike-shedding". Frankly, I haven't heard this particular term until last year's outstanding presentation by Jimmy Bogard.
But let's assume that for whatever reason you haven't so far & don't want to watch Jimmy's vid. Basically ...
Bike-shedding happens when instead of dealing with real problems that are very hard to tackle & possibly out of your comfort zone, you focus on completely unimportant details - just because you know how to deal with those or they are somehow more appealing to you personally.
It's a well-known metaphor of so-called Parkinson's Law of Triviality, that is usually illustrated by very amusing, but probably fictional example of committee working on the design of a new nuclear power plant. According to this urban myth :) the overall task was so overwhelming that committee spent half of the projected time on ... designing such a meaningless, trivial detail as bike-shed for power plant's crew ...
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/cd249/cd2497738ce34ac3a1305212ac985af336bd1efa" alt=""
Regardless whether it really happened or not, don't we encounter such situations every 2nd day when building software?
Jimmy nails it great in his presentation, I can only continue from when he stopped ....
- endless discussions on "design purity & cleanliness" (that e.g. lead to creating pass-through layers)
- premature optimisation of code that's gonna be called twice a day & takes about 200 ms
- introducing new conventions for the sake of using a pattern (because someone has written a blog post about it)
- distributing stuff that could easily work within one, lightweight process (because MICROSERVICES)
- insatiable desire to use a particular new library/technology/framework/tool - because it's the new sexy thing on the web & "it will elevate us to the level our competition can only dream about"
Freaking nightmare for anyone with a basic ability to think pragmatically.
Obviously there are several reasons behind all of that:
- we mistake engineer's MATURITY with her/his proficiency to write code we need - and at some point we believe that the former just came with the latter, while in the fact these two develop independently & frequently with different speed
- so many companies treat Software Engineers as monkeys to turn specifications to syntactically proper code - no surprise that devs quickly get bored & start "masturbating with tech novelties"
- we're too used to jumping straight into SOLUTIONS, while in fact we should always start with factual PROBLEMS (which sometimes really requires some deep diving with subsequent "why" questions) & learn to comparatively prioritise them
OK, these 3 points can be addressed directly (once you've reached certain level of awareness) - is there anything more that could help in fighting off the "bike-shed effect"? Here are few ideas/techniques:
- proper backlog management - either one backlog (as a place where "work items" come from) or few, but with a clear rules for capacity pool split; why is that important? it simplifies the prioritisation a lot: you don't need to quantify the priorities, you do it by item-to-item comparison
- all work made fully visible - e.g. in a project mgmt/ticketing system; why is that important? makes governance much more easier
- don't be afraid of experiments, but make them manageable -> limit WiP for experiments, for each of them clarify the goal, make it clear that outcomes & conclusions need to be documented & validated against the goal, etc.
- make "facts >>> opinions" one of your key ground rules (slap it on your wall!) - helps to cut the crap out
- always, always, always reverse-engineer solutions brought up back to problems they are supposed to solve (or risks to mitigate, opportunities to explore) - the more quantifiable they are, the better
This may sound like a trivial & obvious topic, but I wouldn't treat it too lightly. Bike-shedding is detrimental to general engineering culture - it affects focus, engagement, effectiveness & in general brings a lot of frustration (when you notice that a lot of activity brings no tangible effects ...).
What is worse, it's one of those issues that frequently are not noticed until it's too late ...