Kimota94 posted the other day musing on problem solving and how he had an epiphany about how to work better in a group. It got me thinking about how I approach working in a group and what I should do to improve. Now before everyone jumps on the comment-wagon to point out that I may verbalize a bit on the high side, particularly in group settings and particularly when someone has something that leads to this great episode of Futurama where the Professor says "You'll cease to exist!" and Fry says "but existing is basically all I do!" - I know. Really. I know that I do that, I understand that not everyone wants to follow me down that garden path (I imagine the path is in a garden owned by someone of phenomenal wealth and power and so it is a very large garden). That's why I've continued to blog - so that stuff has some place to go that isn't necessarily at work. If you made it this far, I have some fictional works with run on sentences that go on so far that you forget that the period had ever been invented - you'll think that an 'i' had an accident and was cut down in the prime of life, it's head lolling on the line there wasted and spent; nothing to show for it's former position of dignity and importance on that high pedestal of language which supported it - halted in a full, dead stop.
I think I've noted before that I shouldn't be doing this late at night because it only exacerbates the problem. That's why it is good work is early in the day and after sleep.
I noted in an earlier posting that I have found myself presenting ideas that other people don't follow. That used to happen a lot, but probably because I was in elementary school. As a result, I decided that it would be better if I explicated my ideas to make sure everyone was together. That lead to consensus building, but these take too much time. I find myself explaining things, possibly on the wrong level, to make little headway. So lately I've been changing my strategy to provide a solution and see if there is disagreement.
This works well because people will agree because they have no alternatives, disagree because they have a different idea or disagree because it made them realize something. The first group simply agree, but the second two groups begin to collaborate on a solution. Most importantly it keeps things moving towards any solution. Even if the situation doesn't necessarily call for a solution at the beginning, I think this would be a useful strategy.
There are flaws - some might feel intimidated and never say anything. This means that it has to be done in an inclusive, open manner - care taken in how information is presented. That's no different than any group situation anyway.
If this strategy is not appropriate, the other one I'm trying to employ is the 2-2-6 method. If I recall correctly, this is where a presentation for a group is divided into three sections: presentation, clarification and discussion with length two, two and 6 minutes (respectively). Forces the information presented to be brief and clear, otherwise there will be too many clarification questions. If the second section fails (too long, doesn't seem to be agreement on what the topic is) then you have to try again another time. Otherwise the open discussion proceeds and is limited as well. This technique is used to help keep meetings productive and bounded. Otherwise they become like posts - rambling barely coherent romps through a nether-world of infinite distraction. But I digress...
In another posting I made, I indicated that simple questions were a good thing. It goes beyond programming or development or meetings to more a general heuristic: minimalism. Simpler programs are easier to maintain and modify. Breaking down work into smaller, simpler chunks yields more accurate estimates and easier effort on each piece. Brevity during meetings means shorter meetings - and isn't that the goal of every young boy and girl? Minimalism is perhaps the ultimate engineering expression - doing the most with the least. A classic quote on design and engineering is how I'll end this:
"Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away." - Antoine de Saint Exupery
No comments:
Post a Comment