Applied Team System : EMPs (Expensive Management Practices)

No, No. Bad ISP, Comcast

andy — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 20:19:00 GMT

After years of complaints, Comcast is disclosing its (kind of) Unlimited Internet Service and Always (sort of) On Connections are, in fact, neither.

An AP story today summarizes:

The company — the country's second-largest Internet service provider — also said it was justified in using "reset" packets to break off communications between two computers.

Comcast sometimes inserts these packets in the data stream to kill a file-sharing session. The move "fools" each computer into believing the other computer wants to end the connection.

And my favorite quote:

The return addresses of Comcast's packets indicate they're from one of the file-sharing computers when they are in fact from Comcast.

What the heck? If I was a Comcast customer today I would switch to DSL so fast it would make their collective heads spin. This is called "spoofing" when anyone else does it. If the FCC doesn't fine the bejeezus out of Comcast I will be disappointed. You don't get to turn off the connection because your pitiful little network can't handle the traffic, you upgrade the friggin network!

Andy

On EMPs: Match Game

andy — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 11:31:00 GMT

Introduction

Anyone remember Match Game? </showingMyAge> Gene Rayburn would ask questions and make statements with a "blank" in them. Contestants would then try to guess wich word a celebrity panel would use to fill in the blank.

Here's a Match Game-like statement that falls under Expensive Management Practices (EMPs):

"Don't ______ the people doing the work."

I'm thinking of mass-producing a desk-topper with this printed on it. Maybe add some velcro and supply a few fill-in-the-blank word-blocks with velcro to place there. For managers.

The Usual Disclaimer

I never blog-plain (complain in my blog) about things that are happening now. I put at least 12 months between the event and blogging about it - most of the time much longer - to protect the innocent and guilty alike.

Back To Our Regularly Scheduled Programming

So how would you fill in the blank? If you're an employee, what word or phrase leaps to mind? How about you managers out there? What do you think?

The most polite way I can fill in that blank is to invoke something along the lines of modern interpretation of the Hippocratic Oath - first do no harm. Something like "tick off for no good reason".

If you're running a small business, you need to realize this may be your passion and zeal - but it's just a job to your employees. If you want them to feel any different about it you have to do something different (there's a crazy thought). If you want them more engaged in the best interests of the business, make them part of it. Profit-sharing bonuses, stock options, there are lots of ways to accomplish this.

But It Can Get Worse

There are folks out there who, for lack of anything better to do, enjoy messing with people. Some of these folks inevitably end up in management. Not all managers are like this. I'd venture to say it's a small minority in real life. But my goodness, the damage they do.

They cause small businesses to hemorrhage talent. They cost money. They burn time. They destroy - and all to satisfy some sadistic urge to "be in charge".

I can personally empathize with most people. It helps me understand where they're coming from and what they want out of an exchange / relationship. I cannot empathize with folks who just enjoy messing with folks. I don't know if it's a weakness or a sign of strength - I just cannot go there.

Hope

If you find yourself trapped working for one of these managers there is hope. There's a great book about dealing with these sorts of people: Bullies, Tyrants, and Impossible People: How to Beat Them Without Joining Them. The authors do a great job providing you (and me) with options for handling situations with these folks.

:{> Andy

On Consulting: Deal Or No Deal

andy — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 02:30:00 GMT

Art imitates life, or is it the other way around?

Consulting is a business, but it is also about life and is a form of art. Television is also business, life, and art.

Have you seen the television show Deal Or No Deal? There are 26 closed cases. Contestants choose one and must open the others one at a time in batches of 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, and finally 1. There is a tally board containing a list of the remaining amounts in play. After each batch contestants are made an offer by the elusive "Banker" and they must choose between accepting the offer or continuing the game.

The best possible outcome is to end up with two cases containing the top amounts. And the worst possible outcome is to end up with the lowest two amounts. The contestant's chances of success improve linearly with the average amount remaining in play. Period.

<sideNote>On a side note, the cases are opened by beautiful models. Now I don't know if you've watched the show or not but these models all have something in common. If you've seen the show, you probably know what I mean. The models all have incredible teeth. </sideNote>

How does this relate to consulting, Andy? Are you telling us we need to practice better dental hygiene? I'm glad you asked! Better dental hygiene is always a good idea. But that's not my point. My point is that there are times when you're faced with a similar decision as the contestants on Deal Or No Deal: Take a low-ball offer on the table or decline, holding out for your usual (or a reasonable) rate.

Tom Lambert has an excellent chapter about this in his awesome book: High Income Consulting.

Let me share my own story. It's called "The $5,800.00 Lesson". One day I looked at my checkbook and saw a balance of $80.00. I then looked at the project whiteboard and saw nothing. I said to myself, "Self, you must've done something stupid." I was right. I needed cash, and fast. There were a couple prospects on the prospects whiteboard. One project that looked really good but was three months from starting, and another guy I'd been talking to about some programming - let's call him George. At the time, my programming rate was $70/hour. I explained this to George and he thought I'd make a fine consultant for his project, but he could only pay me half - $35 / hour.

I thought about the mortgage, the projects whiteboard, and my $80.

I wasn't completely stupid. I did recognize we were negotiating and that that was a good thing. SInce I take my quid with a side of pro quo, I countered "I'd need favorable billing terms. Net 10 days on a 15 day billing cycle." George agreed and we shook on it.

That wasn't my big mistake, although it was sizable. My big mistake was not defining a scope of work. These mistakes combined to put me in the unenviable position of being in the half-rate never-ending project (HRNEP). I could never point to anything in writing that defined what I would do or even what would define "completed" so George was free to redefine the scope of the project at will.

Did I mention George was an experienced project manager?

Yeah.

There's a difference between miscommunication and an experienced project manager taking complete and utter advantage of a young programmer / new entrpreneur (this was years ago). Although it took me considerable time to realize what was going on, I eventually figured it out.

In the end I worked on the HRNEP for three months. George became increasingly agitated with the 15-day billing cycle and the Net 10 days. At the end of the HRNEP I realized what was going on. I delivered several working versions of the project to George. In the last month I started taking notes. George didn't mind until he told me I had - once again - not built what he asked and I showed him my notes from the previous meeting, quoting him saying this was precisely what he wanted.

And George was way behind in paying me. He'd pretty much stayed behind after the first check.

George owed me $5,800.00 when he blew up after I showed him my notes. He threatened legal action - breach of verbal contract, I suppose. I realized the crappy situation I'd let myself into had an out, albeit an expensive one. I issued - and faxed - a credit to George for the $5,800.00 and wished him well in finding someone else to work on his ever-changing software project.

It went on for a week or so with email and voice mail and faxes. I knew two things: I'd probably not get sued for the money George owed me and $5,800 was a lot of money to lose, but my choice was between losing that or more.

Ugly.

And expensive.

But I learned some powerful lessons that have stuck with me to this day:

You cannot please everyone. There are times when it's worth the gamble to try. Learning to discern these times is part of the art of consulting.
Sometimes you have to fire your customer. There's good business and bad business. Bad business can hurt you more than good business can help because losses accumulate and gains don't (The Goal).

There is no clean way out. The best you can hope to do when you fire your customer is to break even and this is extremely rare. You will lose. Firing your customer must be considered, and the cost counted, before you make such a drastic move.

It is possible to turn a losing proposition into a win, but it is much more likely you will exhaust yourself to break even.
Most of the time it's better for everyone if you get out of the engagement as soon as you recognize it's a no-win situation.

Sometimes it's best to pass on the "Banker"'s offer and try your luck with the next batch.

:{> Andy

Question Process

andy — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 14:47:00 GMT

Steve Rowe has an excellent post on why we should revisit process and procedure from time to time.

:{> Andy

Who?

andy — Wed, 17 Oct 2007 01:46:00 GMT

A long long time ago in a place far far away...

A project for a large retailer started with a project ~~mangler~~ er, manager and a lowly database developer. The project manager "had once been a developer" and fancied he still was. The database developer also "had once been a developer" but hadn't practiced the craft in several years and so, out of respect for and in deference to people who actually know their asterisk from a hole in a memory map, did not tarnish the field by referring to himself as such.

And it came to pass in a meeting with the newly minted application developers that the lowly database developer repeated a statement he had made several times previously: "I have a bad feeling about using replication in this scenario" he said. "I can't explain it, it just doesn't feel right for the architecture."

Now. We work in a field where emotions should play no part in architectural decisions. And yet, and yet... communication is the art of conveying information, and the lowly database developer was attempting to communicate. He was trying to say "I've worked with replication before and always regretted it." He did, in fact, make that statement during a couple exchanges on the topic. Back to our story...

The project mangler slammed his hand on the table (for emphasis, no doubt) and squeaked "What do you want me to tell our customers? That you have a 'bad feeling'?"

The application developers exchanged looks with each other and glanced from project mangler to database developer.

"Tell them 'It won't scale'" the database developer finally replied. This advice was ignored.

Fast-forward some to enterprise roll-out...

The short version: Replication did not scale. It fell over. Died.

The moral of the story? If you're on a project with someone who has been developing software for longer than you have been alive and you don't really know as much as you would like to think you know and you especially don't know as much as you'd like the customer to think you know and the someone who does know what they're talking about says something with which you disagree and / or don't understand and / or don't like the way in which they said it, don't smack the table; but rather break out your little PMP notebook and write down what they say and find some way to express to the customers what this experienced and knowledgable individual is attempting to convey to you... you just might learn something and save yourself future embarrassment.

Oh, and the post title? It's short for a redneck-ism coined by the great singer / song-writer Toby Keith:

Who's your daddy?

:{> Andy

Technorati Tags: EMPs (Expensive Management Practices) SQL Server 2005 Replication Who's Your Daddy?

Change

andy — Sat, 13 Oct 2007 14:08:00 GMT

Change happens. It's inevitable. Accept it and life will probably be simpler.

Entropy (a physics concept) plays a role in change. How? Entropy is the natural tendency for things to unwind, wind down, age. It's a recognition that, all things being equal, things will skew slightly towards a lower energy level, towards settling.

A friend is going through some changes at work now.

When entropy happens in business, it trends towards more responsibility, lesser benefits, more work, less money. What's odd is my friend's company will, at some point in the future, actually wonder why things turned out the way they did. It's because another physics concept - that of equal and opposite reactions - is as inescapable as entropy.

There are four categories of response to change:

1. Intended Effects (positive).
2. Intended Consequences (negative).
3. Unintended Effects (positive).
4. Unintended Consequences (negative).

We change for the intended stuff, and get the unintended stuff for free. It's a package deal and is as escapable as any other law of physics.

It's possible to work hard and build a great team. Not perfect, but great. I know because I've done it several times. And once that team is built, my job as leader is to simply keep things out of their way. The chief thing I need to keep out of their way is their leader (that would be me).

I consider it the highest compliment and the height of achievement as a leader when the team no longer needs me. I can participate if I want, but I'm no longer required.

Now that's leadership.

(Notice I didn't use the words "manager" or "management". Drucker said "Management is doing things right, leadership is doing the right thing." There's a difference.)

:{> Andy