There is an interesting theory in software development that the quality of your software is limited to that of the second worst programmer on the team. Why the second worst and not the worst programmer?
The theory goes something like this. Everybody in the team knows who the worst programmer is. They usually stand out like a sore thumb and so everyone is carefully watching his work. But because his work is so closely monitored it is also corrected before it impacts the code base. Sure, you end up losing time but you can mitigate the problem because you are aware of it.
Now think about your own team and you will no problems deciding who the worst is. But who is the next worst? Who is the one that nobody is watching but is still checking in poor quality code? Their code spreads like a web throughout the project and so ultimately they limit the quality of the whole teams work. While you are carefully monitoring Mr. Dunce you are blissfully unaware of the time bombs being planted by his prodigy.
So take a look around your office and decide who is wearing the dunce’s hat and then decide who the runner up is. If you come to conclusion that there is no weakest player in your outfit then I have bad news. In poker they have a saying “If you don’t know who the patsy is…” and I hope I don’t need to finish the quote for you.
October 16th, 2008 at 1:03 am
Very interesting. So if there are only 2 developers on my current project, where does that put me?
October 16th, 2008 at 1:42 pm
LOL, I do not think the theory applies if you have such a small team. I would say you need a team of at least 5 on a project before it starts to really apply.
October 16th, 2008 at 11:22 pm
It’s me…. I hope not cuase I am the *ONLY* programmer most of the time.
but we do have a few bits of stuff from past staff who did not stay — sometimes due to the very reason you note… other times … well let’s not gossip :–)