Two factor developer personality type scoring

-

I was recently sitting through a technical discussion and was thinking about how different people were reacting to the information in the presentation. From this I started to think about how a two pairs of related factors seem to influence how people react to new technology. Here's a quick chart showing them as well as examples of prototypical statements a person at each extremes in each quadrant might speak about Source Code Control:

For a bit of definition:

  • The Conservative - Liberal continuum is a measure how inclined you are to try new technologies. An extreme conservative feels no need to use anything new and will never use anything new unless the old thing completely fails to work any more. An extreme liberal would be compelled to change technological approaches before even finishing a prototype because a new shine technology showed up on their radar.
  • The Skeptic - Believer continuum is a measure of how much critical thinking you put into a new technologies capabilities. An extreme skeptic would tend to disregard pundits and anecdotal evidence and require solid proof. An extreme believer will have a religious-like believe in a technology that has no basis in fact.

The reason I put this chart together is to help understand that these things are not binary switches. In addition, some traits are orthogonal (Skeptic and Conservative), but some are in opposition (Skeptic Believer). Moreover, different techniques are necessary to understand how to interact with folks depending on where they fall in both continuums.

Conservatives will generally require a lot of selling or you will need to burn the bridge behind them or they will continue falling back into the "good ol way of doing it". Conservative Believers will be the hardest lot to convince because the sheer amount of time they've been doing something (no matter how stupid it might be) will actually be a reenforcing factor and no amount of factual evidence to the contrary will sway them. On the other hand, a conservative sceptic can often be swayed with evidence and a good business case for doing things "the new way".

Liberals will generally require more oversight as they will tend to embrace and proliferate new technologies. Liberal believers are the most difficult because they will do it just because they read about it on hacker news and it sounded cool. These guys often need to be brought back down to earth lest your systems be riddled with one-off science experiments. Liberal skeptics (I'd put myself largely in this camp) are easiest for me personally to deal with, but I think that's because I'm one of them. For the most part, the closer to each other on the quadrants your team is, the more likely you are to get consensus on what to do (or NOT for some groups.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

the myth of asynchronous JDBC

-
Image
I keep seeing people (especially in the scala/typesafe world) posting about async jdbc libraries. STOP IT! Under the current APIs, async JDBC belongs in a realm with Unicorns, Tiger Squirrels, and 8' spiders. While you might be able to move the blocking operations and queue requests and keep your "main" worker threads from blocking, jdbc is synchronous. At some point, somewhere, there's going to be a thread blocking waiting for a response. It's frustrating to see so many folks hyping this and muddying the waters. Unless you write your own client for a dbms and have a dbms that can multiplex calls over a single connection (or using some other strategy to enable this capability) db access is going to block. It's not impossible to make the calls completely async, but nobody's built it yet. Yes, I know ajdbc is taking a stab at this capability, but even IT uses a thread pool for the blocking calls (be default). Someday we'll have async databa
Read more

The difference between Scalability, Performance, Efficiency, and Concurrency explained

-
I thought I'd give some explanation of the difference between scalability, performance, Efficiency, and concurrency. To make things more accessible (and because I'm watching a cooking show on TV) I'm going to use a baking metaphor to help explain the differences. In our case, the system in question is baking cookies for consumers. Scalability, is how well something responds to adding more resources. If we can double our capacity by doubling the number of resources, we've got linear scalability. In our baking example, if we add more ingredients, we can scale to a larger number of cookies. To contrast with our other metrics, this doesn't actually increase the performance of creating a single cookie (they still take 10 minutes to bake), and the efficiency is the same (we just have more capacity). We also cannot bake more cookies in a fixed time period, but over a larger time period we can produce more cookies. Performance is how fast something can get done, u
Read more

Push versus pull deployment models

-
There are two deployment models: push and pull. In a "Pull" deployment model, the individual servers contact a master server, download their configuration and software, and configure themselves. In a "Push" model, a master server pushes the configuration and software to the individual servers and runs commands remotely. While neither technique is right or wrong, they both have some specific advantages and disadvantages that you should understand when making a decision. In the ruby hosting world, an example of a "push" deployment is heroku , while Engine Yard is an example of a "pull" type deployment. In the Pull model, each server has information about how to obtain it's configuration, when it boots (or whatever the configuration triggering event happens to be) it can continue to proceed without intervention from the master server. In the Push model, because the master server is orchestrating things, it will typically need to have a c
Read more