Skip to main content

Culture that accepts a slight risk of failure (NOT reckless failure) in the interest of being faster and more agile

Let’s start with a few options:
(A)
Be fast, risk failure and if needed quickly recover to succeed.
(B)
Be slow and successfully launch.
Obviously the option A does NOT apply to companies that are building planes, ships, cars, medical equipment and what not. However, it does apply to a lot of other IT organizations.
In option A, I am NOT talking about recklessly failing. I am talking about leading a team and trusting them without watching every single line of code and without introducing too many gates during the development of a project while the developers are what I call “in the zone”. As long as you have professionals on your team, you really need to use “let the baby out of the crib” methodology and allow them to fall as they are learning to walk as a team.
When I say “fail”, I also don’t mean failing foolishly breaking every rule in the architecture book; that’s being foolish and not fast. I am talking about the culture where risking normal failures is NOT looked down upon. It is all about keeping the levels of this risk within normal boundaries and that requires a skill.
This is what “Be Agile” could mean. Let’s call it “The Function of Being Agile”:
We don’t need books and certifications. It just boils down to the above Function of Being Agile that we need to stick to; everything else is catering “Be Agile” approach to your company and it may mean that you implement what Scrum organizations put in place, or it may mean that you deviate from it in order to best achieve the goals in your work environment.
How do you gauge if you are on the right path?
It is simple. If the number of your failures is increasing over time and it is actually slowing you down, than you have to revisit the whole approach.
If the number of your failures is the same or less and you are not slowing down your development and deployments, then you are on the right path as long as those failures are not critical to the business. The goal is to keep iterating and NOT repeat the failures.
At the end of the day, if you have the culture that does NOT look down upon slight failures, your team will have so much fun which typically leads to amazing results. It is beautiful to watch the work in action. You can’t really measure every step of the way, but what you can measure is how much more value you provided to your customers. That’s the measure that matters at the end.
Thank you for reading this article. You can follow me here or you can check out my personal blog: http://www.almirsCorner.com
Almir Mustafic


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Brand New programming language and one solution OR …

Brand New programming language and one solution OR Two existing programming languages, one solution for EACH? I understand that there is no right or wrong. It all depends on your software architecture, team structure, team skills and other factors, but I still want to explain the scenario as it may look familiar to some. Let me explain. Let’s assume that you have microservices and common libraries in two major programming languages. You have some teams who are experts in one and some teams experts in the other programming language. Now you need to come up with a solution for a scenario that all teams will need to leverage. Let’s assume that your cloud platform has an off-the-shelf approach for this but it is supported by a 3rd programming language that your teams do not have much experience in. What is the right thing for your organization and not just from the technical point of view? A) Do you embrace what your cloud platform gives you off the shelf and implement thi...

AWS CodeStar — this is how the cloud computing will work in the future

AWS CodeStar service ?? AWS launched two new important services: * AWS CodeStar * AWS Cloud9 IDE After AWS Re:Invent, I spent some time setting up AWS Cloud9 service. I was a user of Cloud9 before Amazon acquired them. I really like the IDE and I was wondering how it integrates with the rest of the AWS services. Then I did some more learning and setup and here are the results: You can use  AWS CodeStar  service as an orchestrator/workflow that allows you to: (1) Code an application (different templates with different languages) using AWS Cloud9. (2) Manage the source code via AWS CodeCommit. (3) Deploy it using AWS CodeDeploy. All of this is managed through the AWS CodeStar dashboard. As part of creating a project within AWS CodeStar, I had an option to set it up with just one EC2 or with Elastic Beanstalk. For simplicity I chose the EC2 flavor and successfully deployed the “Hello World” Python Flask application using AWS CodeStar. After I deployed ...

Programming / Software Engineering  — Think Paper, Paper, then Code

Most of the software engineering problems are solved in what I call the high-level brainstorming sessions. We basically walk into a meeting room and white-board our thoughts and come up with solutions. When things start falling apart, you better believe this happens in the last stretch of projects and it does work.  Now the issue is that we as programmers do NOT do the similar type of exercise before a line of code is written ? I typically see developers get requirements in the form of a document or a user story or in the form of walk-by requirements. The next thing I see on developers’ screens is code editors or IDEs. Is that the right thing to do? You may say that you are advanced enough and that you like to dive into coding right away, but this happens even to the best of us. We fall into this trap and rarely step back and review our habits. We have to go back to fundamentals. What did we do in school?  Professors taught us to write down our thoughts and to show what...