Thursday, April 03, 2008

The three things that make us great: culture, culture and culture

My last post was in response to George Dinwiddie's "What would you like your software developers to learn" question. Here is a follow-up exchange that I wanted to share.

George wrote back to me asking:

Are your developers learning more how to take a long-term view? What steps are you currently taking to help them learn? What steps do you think you should take, but aren't yet, for some reason?

The rest of this post is my answer.


I think that one of the key roles that manager/architect types need to play is that of strategist. As one of my senior developers put it recently: "I know about tactics, what I need is strategy." An ability to predict the outcome of various actions is, in my experience, an indispensable quality in those who are responsible for guiding the overall direction of a development effort.

Some developers care about learning how to do this and some don't. Not everybody on the team needs to be a superstar, and there is usually no shortage of trash to be taken out by those who want to do that (or who lack the chops to do much else). On the other hand, those developers that do want to grow should be encouraged and given the appropriate tools.

On my team, I have a pretty heterogenous group where about 30% of them are interested in learning this stuff. They come from a variety of backgrounds and so some are starting from further back than others. I find that a good strategy for winnowing the grain from the chaff is to offer some of the basic tenets to everybody and see who picks up on it.

We have a 1.5 hour workshop once a week where we go over various parts of our codebase, learn about new techniques, have different developers do presentations on code they have written or had to maintain, etc. Generally I follow up on those workshops with additional attention to those whose eyes do not glaze over when we start talking about certain things.

We also have a very strong team culture that encourages developers to watch each others' backs and make sure that the "social contract" we have all agreed to is upheld. Most of the questions that I listed in my initial answer are things that my guys and gals check each other on all the time. It's a bit of a game: who can find the mistake in the other person's work. This, of course, is all done in a spirit of cooperation and mutual acceptance of constructive criticism (critical components in any team).

I am fortunate to have the leeway to do pretty much whatever I want to improve the current performance of my team. In that respect, I rarely find that there are things I want to do but cannot. This is not the same in every environment, of course, but I select the companies I work for specifically keeping in mind the fact that the most successful companies are the ones that pick the right people, put them in the right place, and get out of the way while they do their job.

At the end of the day I would say that the single most important factor in turning competent developers into excellent ones is culture. I try to lead by example and I expect my seniors to do the same. Every senior on my team had the role and responsibilities long before they had the title. Every junior on my team is capable of training up new juniors (and even some more intermediate-level developers) to be effective within two iterations (four weeks). The culture on our team is one of constant improvement and the juniors frequently teach the seniors lessons (which the seniors take in stride). With the right culture, everything else just seems logical. Without it, you are constantly swimming against the current.

From competence to excellence: what developers should know

One of the things that most developers have a lot of trouble with is a long-term view. I think it is critical that there be a very good understanding of the impact of current decisions and design choices on the future of the project and the company. A lot of developers (and in my experience this is only worse with contractors and consultants) have the impression that once the code is written, the job is done. They frequently omit details such as sustainability of the overall system and how easy it will be to make future changes.

One good indicator of a developer's current level of understanding of this concept is to look at the following:

Coding Practices

Does the developer write idiomatic code that would be easy for any other developer to understand given a basic comprehension of the development environment? Are the interfaces to their objects clean, minimal and easily understood? Are the techniques used to modularize their code sparingly and appropriately applied? Do they consistently strive for high coherence and low coupling in the codebase? Do they understand the value of a properly written test suite?

Source Management

Does the developer understand more than the basics of their source control tool? Do they know how to do branching and merging properly? Do they leave clear, concise comments for each commit? Common errors when using SCM tools include incorrect spelling for changeset names (which makes searching for a particular changeset difficult), bundling of unrelated changes into a single changeset (which makes reverting only one of the changes difficult/impossible), linking changesets to the incorrect development task (which makes it difficult to assert that a particular task has been completed successfully) and fumbling with branch and merge (which causes problems when a developer needs to work on some separate task - how do I fork the codebase? how do I re-integrate my changes? etc.)

Development Environment

Is the development environment properly documented and easy to re-build? Can each developer work on any other developer's machine or do they need their "own setup"? Does the development style employed by the developer depend on a specific tool that may not be supported in the future (i.e. web developers who do everything in DreamWeaver, Java developers who are lost without Eclipse's auto-complete and refactoring tools, etc.)? Is the project neatly organized such that it's physical layout (on the filesystem) is easy to understand/explain?

Developers who have a good grasp of the above concepts also usually have a more complete understanding of the lifecycle of a software product (as a product and not as a project). By looking ahead, and by applying certain principles now, we can often have a huge impact on the future maintainability of a system. Maybe I'm just lucky to work with guys and gals that have the basics down pat but I would say that the above is what separates the "software developers" from the "coders". Obviously, there are a number of more basic items that come first but a long-term view of the evolution of a codebase is something that lifts developers from competence to excellence.