Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Rise of the New Groupthink

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 86 posts

Re: The Rise of the New Groupthink

#51

Post by BadassFractal »

calibraxis wrote: post #45
BadassFractal wrote: post #6

This is very interesting, especially in light of certain software development approaches such as XP, where you're told to work in pairs as much as possible. Many people argue that you haven't truly experienced teamwork until you've pair developed for a whole workday together for months at a time. The approach works for several companies, Pivotal Labs comes to mind. I've personally experienced benefits of that work st…

I vaguely recall reading somewhere that pair programming wasn't meant to be for more than a few hours a day (like 4). An agile coach I know agreed with this. But I can't easily find this caveat on the net.

I remember seeing that, you're right. I believe it's actually in Extreme Programming Explained, or in one of those other core books. If I recall correctly, the guideline was to avoid pair work at maximum intensity for longer than 4 hours (small breaks are implied).

Re: The Rise of the New Groupthink

#52

Post by nathansobo »

I've spent far more programming hours pair-programming than working alone. It works for me. This fall I decided I wanted to learn Cocoa, so I called up Pivotal Labs and asked if they had any iOS projects I could work on. They paired me with someone who had been working with Cocoa for a year. On day one I was adding value. Within two weeks I was proficient, and within a month I was working as fast or faster than other developers at Pivotal. I wouldn't have been able to do it alone.

Pairing is the fastest way to ramp up in a new language, ecosystem, or codebase. And beyond just ramping up, it continues to teach you long after you reach mastery, because you're constantly exposed to new perspectives and ideas. Pairing is also good for the team... by rotating pairs frequently, you distribute knowledge through the team. It's like a RAID array for your codebase.

People talk about the cost of being interrupted. But what about the cost of having to read through someone's solo-written code when they're home sick and not understanding it? When your team is pairing, you can interrupt one person while the other person keeps coding, maintaining the focus for the pair. If you have a question, ask it. If the team needs to know something, tell them.

Working alone is good, too. I enjoy rocking out with my headphones or working quickly from a gut level understanding and not having to articulate it to a pair in words. But often I find that my solo code improves when I expose it to feedback from a pair. Not a slow asynchronous code review, but a real time back and forth conversation. For me, software is a social activity. Deadly silent offices give me the creeps.

Re: The Rise of the New Groupthink

#53

Post by dredmorbius »

mekoka wrote: post #18

The book "Peopleware" has documented this very concept decades ago (according to wikipedia, first edition was published in 1987), yet here we are in 2012 with still more "cool open" environments for programming teams. Here's a link to the top positive review in amazon, giving an insight as to its content http://www.amazon.com/review/R1R3N8JI29OPPE/ref=cm_cr_pr_vie... Lots of startups want to recreate the cafe experie…

A huge difference at a cafe (or library, or beach villa patio ...) is that the people around you don't have any say in your activity. Other than, perhaps, the cafe manager who could kick you out for hogging the table.

But, generally, the people there are strangers (or casual aquaintences), not workplace bosses, subordinates, rivals, or even true collaborators. So what they do has a lot less influence on you than would be the case at an office (or a home environment for those who work at home with roommates or family).

Not only does this reduce interruptions (other than someone with low social awareness or boundaries, you're not likely to get interrupted), but the conversations and activities at other tables don't concern you. While you might casually observe or evesdrop as a diversion, you've got no stake in the outcome of a given conversation or interaction.

Similarly, you can flirt with the boy or girl at the next table without worrying about it turning into an HR issue.

This is much less the case in an office. Particularly one with any sort of disfunctional relationships.

Online collaborative projects (including Free Software projects) typically operate similarly. People participate because they're interested and are capable. You can't be fire (OTOH: you're often not being paid), but in a sense this is a good thing as it disintermediates work and work product from concerns over how that product is received.

Re: The Rise of the New Groupthink

#54

Post by dredmorbius »

drcube wrote: post #26

Off topic: The illustrator is apparently Andy Rementer, and while his name isn't familiar, the art very much is. Where else has this guy's work been featured?

http://andyrementer.com/?page_id=6

Though I'm thinking I've seen similar styles before. It's vaguely reminiscent of some of the 1960s/1970s psychedelic comics such as R. Crumb. Not really my forte though.

Re: The Rise of the New Groupthink

#55

Post by SiVal »

seiji wrote: post #15
jgrant27 wrote: post #9

The mind is sharper and keener in seclusion and uninterrupted solitude. No big laboratory is needed in which to think. Originality thrives in seclusion free of outside influences beating upon us to cripple the creative mind. Be alone, that is the secret of invention; be alone, that is when ideas are born. That is why many of the earthly miracles have had their genesis in humble surroundings. -Nikola Tesla

These are the voices which we hear in solitude, but they grow faint and inaudible as we enter into the world. Society everywhere is in conspiracy against the manhood of every one of its members. I shun father and mother and wife and brother, when my genius calls me. I would write on the lintels of the door-post, Whim. I hope it is somewhat better than whim at last, but we cannot spend the day in explanation. Expect m…

When my genius calls me, it waits on hold for a while then hangs up, because I'm in a meeting.

Re: The Rise of the New Groupthink

#56

Post by SiVal »

jshen wrote: post #37
jonnathanson wrote: post #31

"In one fourth-grade classroom I visited in New York City, students engaged in group work were forbidden to ask a question unless every member of the group had the very same question." This is the essence of what's so destructive and horrifying about today's obsession with groups: the idea that everyone in the group is equal. Equal in talent, equal in work ethic, equal in drive, and equally entitled to being heard. A…

"In one fourth-grade classroom I visited in New York City, students engaged in group work were forbidden to ask a question unless every member of the group had the very same question." I'm going to guess that the idea here is that if someone in the group has a question, and another member of the group knows the answer, then they can resolve it within the group. Funny how the same thing can be framed so differently is…

So if anyone in your group insists he knows the answer, you're out of luck. Reframe: The blind leading the blind.

So if anyone in your group doesn't care about your question, you're out of luck. Reframe: I don't know why I even bother.

So if anyone in your group is more interested in a different question, you're both out of luck. Reframe: Sorry, class, we're out of time.

Yes, it's funny how many ways a bad idea can be framed differently.

Re: The Rise of the New Groupthink

#58

Post by DuncanIdaho »

What I find gross is that the article somehow considers cubicles as a "private" solution.

This modern management cargo cult has reached really gross levels of absurdity.

If open plan is a cacophony of voices amidst which a person is to find focus and deep thinking, then cubicles are the same cacophony without the peripheral vision part.

I find teamwork, collaboration and such bullshit words just a mask for true motive. Cheapness. Cheapness in landlords, Cheapness in architects and Cheapness in companies who ultimately make up reasons for why they don't want to spend money and time on building truly productive environments.

Its sort of sour grapes situation.

Re: The Rise of the New Groupthink

#59

Post by lhnz »

hammerdr wrote: post #24

There are many parts of this article that boil my blood. The biggest of which is the use of "Groupthink" to describe a practice of creativity. Groupthink has a very specific meaning in many peoples minds which does not apply in this situation. Dilution of the word Groupthink as well as the mischaracterization of a practice the author happens to dislike are both egregious. Creativity is often spoken of as an end. I do…

> If we have 50 programmers working in complete isolation then we will have 50 different programs. Collaboration becomes key to scaling the craft.

Since most programs can be broken down into a set of components I believe it should be relatively easy to parallellize the workload.

Re: The Rise of the New Groupthink

#60

Post by brc »

nirvana wrote: post #38

In East Germany, toddlers and grade schoolers were required to go to the bathroom together, with no partitions between the toilets. Privacy was irrelevant because individualism was irrelevant. Even extending into bathroom habits the communist goal was to make people cogs. I'm sure this seemed like "scientific management" to them, and I bet many of them have no idea why it failed. At my last job, all the programmers w…

Thanks for the stories. I love hearing from people who lived in former East Germany. The stuff that went on is just hard to imagine sometimes. I'm always left wondering if there were any true believers, or if everyone just went along with a 'well, what can you do' shrug and made the most of it while privately laughing at the attempt to recreate society in a new image.
Post reply on HN