Re^2: Beyond Agile: Subsidiarity as a Team and Software Design Principle

[Your Mother]

This continues to be a most interesting episodic series of articles. Thank you for continuing to post them.

I think you mean eyepopslikeamosquito's series. This seems to be einhverfr's first meditation on the subject.

Also, I disagree with or would offer different rationale for most of you said. Quick examples: Testing can begin before any code is written. Your fluff about the necessity of integration is in complete contradiction to the definition of "unit" testing.

Anarchy is no substitute for design.

And yet for thousands of years of human history we said exactly the opposite about Nature because anarchy produces streamlined, highly-tailored, efficient results given the time and capital^W resources. It's rigid master plans that fail predictably. "Tactics" ne "Strategy".

[einhverfr]

I would agree that anarchy is no substitute for design. You can't have top-notch security without design for example.

The problem is that usually we are given a false choice of "let's do the blueprints first and fully design everything to the smallest detail and then code" and "let's just start coding." In reality the choice isn't between micromanagement and anarchy, but between segmented responsibility with coordination and either of those two. In my view, segmented responsibility is the clear winner.

[Your Mother]

I was arguing the philosophy leading up to the statement was misguided and that a master plan (strategy) cannot be directly applied in daily work (tactics).

Segmented responsibility, which I agree is the way things work best in the world, not just project management, looks like anarchy from 10,000 feet or on a 10 year project plan. Intelligent design, crock that it is, has been a persuasive idea for all human history because self-interested "anarchy" churns out things like spider silk, gecko toes, echolocation, and mantis shrimp eyes and claws in immeasurable amounts.