the 3 P’s: people process product
description
Transcript of the 3 P’s: people process product
![Page 1: the 3 P’s: people process product](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062520/568165f8550346895dd9232e/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
20 September 2010
THE 3 P’S:PEOPLE
PROCESSPRODUCT
![Page 2: the 3 P’s: people process product](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062520/568165f8550346895dd9232e/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
People
![Page 3: the 3 P’s: people process product](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062520/568165f8550346895dd9232e/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Importance of PeopleMost important factor in the quality of software is the quality of the programmers
If your life depended on a particular piece of software, what would you want to know about it?
that the person who wrote it was “both highly intelligent and possessed by an extremely rigorous, almost fanatical desire to make their program work the way it should.” Terry Bollinger (2001)
![Page 4: the 3 P’s: people process product](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062520/568165f8550346895dd9232e/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
People are primary Goal-driven human processes are self-
healingRule-driven processes are fragile
Public communication Space
Cave and Commons ○ Stewart Brand, How Buildings Learn
Peopleware DeMarco and Lister
![Page 5: the 3 P’s: people process product](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062520/568165f8550346895dd9232e/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Knowledge Workers … prefer closed offices but communicate better in
open ones congregate in particular geographical areas move around in the course of their work collaborate concentrate work in the office communicate with people who are close by don't care about facilities gewgaws
Davenport, Why Office Design Matters 2005
FUNDAMENTAL CONFLICTS
![Page 6: the 3 P’s: people process product](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062520/568165f8550346895dd9232e/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Forming - polite but untrusting Storming - testing others Norming - valuing other types Performing - flexibility from trust Adjourning - disengagement
Tuckman Team Stages
Tuckman, Bruce. (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological bulletin, 63, 384-399.
![Page 7: the 3 P’s: people process product](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062520/568165f8550346895dd9232e/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Core Competency: problem-solving ability
Personal Attributes Openness Supportiveness Action orientation Positive personal style
Good Team Member
![Page 8: the 3 P’s: people process product](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062520/568165f8550346895dd9232e/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Constructive: for all team members
Productive: brings out the best thinking in all team members
Mutual Understanding: seeking to understand others’ perspectives
Self Corrective
Positive Team Relationships
![Page 9: the 3 P’s: people process product](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062520/568165f8550346895dd9232e/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Focus◦ clear about what you are doing
Climate◦ positive◦ inclusive◦ focus on the issue…not the person
Open CommunicationIssues identified, discussed, prioritized and acted on
Effective Team Problem Solving
![Page 10: the 3 P’s: people process product](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062520/568165f8550346895dd9232e/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Collaborator◦ Works to find a solution that satisfies all concerns
Accommodator◦ Neglects own concerns to satisfy others
Compromiser◦ Tries to satisfy others without giving up own concerns
Competitor◦ Pursues own concerns at other’s expense
Avoider◦ Evades the situation and never addresses
Styles in Conflict Resolution
![Page 11: the 3 P’s: people process product](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062520/568165f8550346895dd9232e/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Larson and LaFasto Teamwork: What Must Go Right/What Can
Go WrongWhen Teams Work Best
○ Accumulated information from 600 teams
Additional Reference
![Page 12: the 3 P’s: people process product](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062520/568165f8550346895dd9232e/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Processes
![Page 13: the 3 P’s: people process product](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062520/568165f8550346895dd9232e/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Fundamental Steps Requirements Design Implementation Integration Test Deployment Maintenance
![Page 14: the 3 P’s: people process product](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062520/568165f8550346895dd9232e/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Processes Differ by how often you do the steps
Points on the spectrumDifferences in overhead
Three fundamental processesWaterfallSpiralIterative
![Page 15: the 3 P’s: people process product](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062520/568165f8550346895dd9232e/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Waterfall Do it once Traditional model Used for large next version releases,
especially when tightly coupled changes
![Page 16: the 3 P’s: people process product](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062520/568165f8550346895dd9232e/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Waterfall 1970s Built on 1950’s
stage-wise process
Recognized the need for feedback LimitedHeavy process
![Page 17: the 3 P’s: people process product](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062520/568165f8550346895dd9232e/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Waterfall Pros
Simple documentation managementClean design phase
ConsLeast flexibilityNo early feedback
![Page 18: the 3 P’s: people process product](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062520/568165f8550346895dd9232e/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Iterative (a.k.a. Agile) Many iterations Each iteration is on a fixed cycle
Typically biweekly
Used for projects with lots of small independent, but well understood, changes
![Page 19: the 3 P’s: people process product](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062520/568165f8550346895dd9232e/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Iterative Reaction to waterfall Derived from “evolutionary” process
Requirements and specs evolve over time Two well-known models (will look at
later)Extreme programmingSCRUM
![Page 20: the 3 P’s: people process product](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062520/568165f8550346895dd9232e/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Iterative (a.k.a. Agile) Pros
Fast feedback on problems Very adaptable to any changes Lots of versions to work with Heavy user involvement
Cons Document maintenance Code maintenance Requires good automation
![Page 21: the 3 P’s: people process product](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062520/568165f8550346895dd9232e/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Spiral Few iterations Each iteration adds new requirements Used often for projects with less well
defined requirements
![Page 22: the 3 P’s: people process product](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062520/568165f8550346895dd9232e/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Spiral Risk based Barry Boehm 1988 “A Spiral Model of
Software Development and Enhancement”
![Page 23: the 3 P’s: people process product](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062520/568165f8550346895dd9232e/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Spiral Pros
Adaptation to changes based on risksGood customer interactionEarly versionLimited iterations provide phase structure
ConsDocument maintenance
![Page 24: the 3 P’s: people process product](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022062520/568165f8550346895dd9232e/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Unified Process Variant of Spiral Identifies that
iterations differ Also known as
Rational Unified Process (Rational products)