Ability or methodology?
Join the DZone community and get the full member experience.Join For Free
there’s been a lot of chatter recently on the intertubes about whether some developers are 10x more productive than others (e.g. here , here and here ). i’m not going to argue whether this or that study is valid or not; i am not a scientist and i don’t play one on tv, so i’m not going to get into that argument.
however, i do think these kinds of studies are exactly what we need more of. the biggest challenges in software development are people – individual ability and how we work together; not computer science or the technical. software development has more in common with psychology and sociology than engineering or maths. we should be studying software development as a social science.
recently i got to wondering: where are the studies that prove that, say, tdd works; or that pair programming works. where are the studies that conclusively prove scrum increases project success or customer satisfaction? ok, there are some studies – especially around tdd and some around scrum (hyper-performing teams anyone?) – but a lazy google turns up very little. i would assume that if there were credible studies into these things they’d be widely known, because it would provide a great argument for introducing these practices. of course, its possible that i’m an ignorant arse and these studies do exist… if so, i’m happy to be educated
but before i get too distracted, steve’s post got me thinking: if the variation between individuals really can be 10x, no methodology is going to suddenly introduce an across the board 20x difference. this means that individual variation will always significantly dwarf the difference due to methodology.
perhaps this is why there are so few studies that conclusively show productivity improvements? controlling for individual variation is hard. by the time you have, it makes a mockery of any methodological improvement. if “hire better developers” will be 5x more effective than your new shiny methodology, why bother developing and proving it? ok, except the consultants who have books to sell, conferences to speak at and are looking for a gullible customer to pay them to explain their methodology – i’m interested in the non-crooked ones, why would they bother?
methodologies and practices in software development are like fashion . the cool kid down the hall is doing xp. he gets his friends hooked. before you know it, all the kids are doing xp. eventually, everyone is doing xp, even the old fogies who say they were doing xp before you were born. then the kids are talking about scrum or software craftsmanship. and before you know it, the fashion has changed. but really, nothing fundamentally changed – just window dressing. bright developers will always figure out the best, fastest way to build software. they’ll use whatever fads make sense and ignore those that don’t (ddd, i’m looking at you).
the real challenge then is the people. if simply having the right people on the team is a better predictor of productivity than choice of methodology, then surely recruitment and retention should be our focus. rather than worrying about scrum or xp; trying to enforce code reviews or pair programming. perhaps instead we should ensure we’ve got the best people on the team, that we can keep them and that any new hires are of the same high calibre.
and yet… recruitment is a horrible process. anyone that’s ever been involved in interviewing candidates will have horror stories about the morons they’ve had to interview or piles of inappropriate cvs to wade through. candidates don’t get an easier time either: dealing with recruiters who don’t understand technology and trying to decide if you really want to spend 8 hours a day in a team you know little about. it almost universally becomes a soul destroying exercise.
but how many companies bring candidates in for half a day’s pairing? how else are candidate and employer supposed to figure out if they want to work together? once you’ve solved the gnarly problem of getting great developers and great companies together – we’ll probably discover the sad truth of the industry: there aren’t enough great developers to go round.
so rather than worrying about this technology or that; about scrum or xp. perhaps we should study why some developers are 10x more productive than others. are great developers born or made? if they’re made, why aren’t we making more of them? university is obviously poor preparation for commercial software development, so should there be more vocational education – a system of turning enthusiastic hackers into great developers? you could even call it apprenticeship.
that way there’d be enough great developers to go round and maybe we can finally start having a grown up conversation about methodologies instead of slavishly following fashion.
Opinions expressed by DZone contributors are their own.