Surrogates
Business does not like:
1. 1C-Franchisee, 1C programmers in general, and almost everything they do;
2. web programmers and companies creating and promoting websites and all products of their work;
3. quality management systems and people who are engaged in their implementation;
4. accountants and accounting;
5. economists with all of their giant ekselevsky footcloths;
6. internal development projects, which it is impossible to look at without tears;
7. Scrum and all these boards on which the same stickers hang for weeks;
8. CBT, after the introduction of which the deficit and illiquid assets become even greater;
9. Controlling, which gives figures later than accounting;
10. KPI, the adequacy of which you have to prove yourself every time they bring these numbers;
11. Motivation systems, which, whatever one may say, “salary + bonus”, though called fashionable words, such as “grade”.
You can continue indefinitely. Have you ever wondered why the business does not like all this? Or did they not even notice that the business does not like this?
')
At the same time, oddly enough, the business likes:
1. increase business profitability through automation;
2. increase in the number of leads and increase in turnover due to proper promotion;
3. improving the quality of production processes and business processes;
4. useful accounting, giving a simple and clear picture of the business in numbers according to the principles of double entry;
5. useful management accounting, giving timely figures and forecasts of the state of the company;
6. effective efficiency improvement projects launched and implemented within the company, with a small budget and competencies stored in the company;
7. improving the efficiency of project or streaming work by 2-4 times;
8. multiple increase in turnover and profits, reduction of all types of stocks, disposal of excess capacity of all types;
9. an accurate management system that timely reacts to deviations and helps to make the right decisions to all participants in the processes;
10. multifaceted, understandable, correctly converging in 1-3 digits the evaluation system of all business areas, giving an assessment of the state of affairs in a few minutes without lengthy meetings and reports;
11. a clear system of measurement and evaluation of human labor, which also performs the function of management, allowing you to disperse half of unnecessary managers who like to “lead with their hands” (= “lead”).
Feel the difference? Or not yet? I specifically made a list of one-to-one, so you can match.
In order to confuse you even more, I’ll add clause 12, which is common to everyone: business loves to read books by various gurus about all the topics listed, the same Gates, Deming, Ono, Goldratt, Sutherland, etc.
Now I am sure you understood everything.
In the books - the original standard. How it should be. For what it was invented. Purpose. What should give automation to business. How is the work on the project 4 times faster? How to make losses from a marriage a probability, not a reality. How to manage a business, spending 20 minutes on it once a month and reading one A4 sheet with three digits. How to increase the turnover at times, just buying only what you need. Who does not like this? And authoritative people write, and in practice everything is checked, and you can go see. Original. Like Mona Lisa in the Louvre, which always has crowds of Chinese and Japanese.
The second list is the mental projections of the original on a particular business. The leader read, was inspired, wanted the same way, looked at his business through the prism of the original, saw the obvious benefits from the changes, formulated a goal.
And here come into action friends from the first list. I do not know the best phraseologism that will describe the first list than “they wanted the best, but it turned out as always.” There is a little less suitable - "we will not catch up, so at least we will get warm."
There is, however, an anti-pattern, I will cite the key quotation: “Our job is to find the most convenient, simple and beautiful way to solve the problem, without losing sense on the way . ” I will not judge how they follow their slogan, but it sounds beautiful.
Enough to beat around the bush, this article is about surrogates and their producers.
A surrogate is when they did not what they asked for. Or not as requested. Or did not do what they asked. Or they did it when they didn't ask.
Surrogates are the most terrible evil that is happening now with Russian business and government. Surrogates - this is the best killer in the world of efficiency. What is especially nice, we, programmers, this time not to the side - we are on the very axis of evil.
You and I have no direct dialogue, and this is wonderful. You do not have to defend, attack and defend. Just think and look around, remember your projects, automated companies, their managers. And try to remember what you said at the first meetings.
I once was 1Sniki. I started working in 2005, immediately with v8 and UPP, so I found a big HYIP automation of industrial enterprises, which was in 2005-2009.
Always - always - the customer wanted the same thing, although he called it in different words. Reduce costs, get numbers in a timely manner, reduce staff, plan everything, see the effectiveness of people, make management decisions based on system data, blah blah blah.
And always - always - the customer received the same thing. The customer has always received the automation of accounting, regl. payroll, the beginnings of CRM, simple accounting management, instructions for working with the Planning Assistant, a bunch of printing plates for all occasions, a bunch of code and updating releases for 100 hours each (until the SCP is not stopped developing), the need to hire a 1C programmer (and better than two) and a bloated staff of accountants, economists and other operators who, together with the 1C programmer, become system appendages.
No, there were, of course, exceptions. I had to write this phrase to soften the wording. But there were no exceptions.
Another industry rich in surrogates is quality management. Surely heard about "the introduction of a quality management system in accordance with international standards ISO 9001". It is almost always a surrogate.
There are exceptions already. For example, a company needs an ISO certificate to participate in a tender. Then everything is fair - you can simply buy a certificate (this is illegal, of course, but it is possible).
But among the managers, romantics who have read somewhere that ISO standards are squeezing best management practices have not been translated; having introduced them in a company, one can seriously increase its competitive advantages, increase the transparency of processes, make measurable results for all consumers, external and internal , declare yourself internationally, blah blah blah. Nothing like?
As a result of the implementation of the ISO standard, nothing good usually happens.
The best option, i.e. the lesser evil is when a small department is created, sometimes from one person, who deals with all these pieces of paper and undergoes recertification. It is just that sometimes he slips the next audit reports, process improvement cards, reports with quality indicators for the quarter, etc., to managers for signing.
The variant is worse - when all these pieces of paper are really embedded in life processes. No one, incl. implementers do not know why these papers are needed in the process. But there is an excuse - this is from the ISO standard. And its developers are so far away that there is no one to ask.
Fortunately, getting rid of the implemented ISO standard is pretty easy, as some already do. Just throw it in the trash and cease to pass certification.
There are lots of less common surrogate manufacturers. This includes most of the business consultants with all their TPS, Scrum, Lean, etc.
About site makers and not worth mentioning. It is enough to remember why they are invited - to increase sales.
Now - about how and why surrogates do appear. They must obey some laws.
The production of surrogates, as a trend, is based on three pillars: formalism, gradualism and collective responsibility .
The main is probably the formalism , you all know about it. This is the first phase of surrogate production. It begins with the phrase “let's fix it on paper now”. So there are all sorts of requirements, contracts, projects, stages, schedules, deadlines. Usually in the project documentation do not forget to mention the purpose of the project - those fantasies that the customer said at the first meeting. But as we know from life, no one then reads the section “Goals”.
The main thing - as soon as possible to transfer attention to the details. To give a person, instead of his goals, the illusion of control - these are the stages, schedules, tasks, you control, we will take you, assign those responsible, let them check everything, adjust the requirements, increase the budget if necessary.
See what happens? Trite - shifting the focus of attention. How often they write in the opposition media, transferring attention from real problems to fictional ones. We create a problem with which you have to mess around a lot, and a person enthusiastically tinkers.
For example, with monitoring the timing of work. This is a favorite business of all managers - to control the timing. And when it comes to a multi-million dollar project, God himself ordered to inflate his cheeks - I’m busy with important business, I’m in control of the timing.
At this stage, the goal of the project generally disappears from view. About her, no one remembers. And the further, the less they will remember.
This was the first stage of the formalism — the substitution of a goal by a list of tasks. A separate, very interesting topic - how do goals turn into tasks? Many books, dissertations, methods (mathematical, statistical, fashion management) have been written on this topic, and it seems that everyone should be able to do this.
And what really? Here in the 1C environment: Franchisee, for example. Coming with the project of introduction to the enterprise, we know in advance what will be implemented there. Listening to the goals of the project is rather a formality. We simply tick the subsystems that are in priority in this enterprise. Well, and those on which you can lay more hours because of the close attention of the management of the enterprise, or (sometimes) unhealthy love for a particular site.
We do not need your goals, buddy. We need your budget, and let's quickly fix it all on paper.
In the process, a smaller formalism is connected - we will not do work beyond the budget, we will not do two interface options, we will not work on performance if it is limited by the platform (and who will check it?).
In the project documentation, in addition to the objectives of the project, written success criteria. It seems the right thing - the formula by which it is estimated whether the project was successful or not.
When it comes to an internal project carried out by employees of the company itself, there is a sense in the criteria. The career of the project manager and key employees depends on them. Made a project to reduce accounting, if in fact the accounting department has declined - hurray, you are a Great Accountant. You are more likely to be entrusted to a cut by economists. Or even offered, maybe they will insist.
And if this is an external project, with a french? Who needs these criteria for success, if all the stages are behind, the acts are signed, the money is paid? Well, the owner probably needs to once again make sure that there is nothing to love 1snikov. And if for the first time with such a collision, then cry and dive into our real world.
Formalism accompanies surrogates everywhere. To see this, you just have to look around.
Look at the state administration. On legislative activities. To your city. On your management company. Try to see a surrogate. By the way, now is the time - soon elections. Who will remember now what goals these goals faced? Not such as “development of the entrusted territory”, but concrete, measurable, understandable. They themselves do not remember. And what will they give you as a result of their work? Yes, anything - what, despite the formalism, they managed to do, even if they did not do it.
They built a kindergarten - this is our result, they will say. What was the goal? Provide all children from 2 years old with kindergartens. How much for this had det.sadov build? 15 let's say And they built one. Surrogate? The stump is clear. He was also built not by the city, but by the developer of the microdistrict, because he had to.
Distracted. The second whale is gradual . Actually, I opened it already, when I talked about formalism.
There is no franchise (although no, there is one), who will say at the first meeting - we write a schedule, spit on your goals, you need to do it this way and that way, as we write it, there will be no changes in the schedule and budget, the project will be 2 specialist and under no circumstances will not be added, ERP, we have no one knows, we will learn at your expense, the portfolio on our site is bullshit, etc.
All this the customer will know in the course of the project, from the first to the last item, plus a dozen more. But he learns gradually, otherwise it will not be possible to produce a surrogate - they just won't let him in.
Graduation is crucial. When used correctly, the vector of the project or product can be gradually rotated 180 degrees and twisted into a snake. In order to feel with all my heart how gradual it is, I strongly recommend choosing the time and watching the film “Dogville” by Lars von Trier. When I was a CIO, this film was a must-see for all subordinate programmers. There, however, the goal was slightly different, smaller.
The film was supposed to show programmers how the “gradual” whale would turn them into surrogates. After all, every programmer in his heart considers himself an architect, a system builder, a business efficiency enhancer. It is without irony - it should be so.
And what happens next with such a romantic?
User : "And help me set up a report ..."
Programmer : “Let me tell you better how to customize reports in general, you can do it yourself”
User : "Yes, now there is no time, the boss is waiting, well, help"
Programmer : "Ok, now"
...
User : "We would set up the distribution of costs, the month does not close"
Programmer : “Well, I’ve shown you how to do it, I did the training, I wrote the instructions.”
User : "Well, something does not work out for us, help, it's hard for you, well, you're a programmer"
Programmer : “No, I won't, I’m not an errand boy, you’re getting paid for it”
User : “We’ll hand over the profits tomorrow, I’ll tell the director that you didn’t help, we'll see later who gets paid for what!”
Programmer : “Okay, for the last time I will help”
...
User : “Listen, we have a new price list with supplier prices, fill in 1C”
Programmer : "Sam zaley"
User : "In the sense of myself? You are a programmer. ”
Programmer : “I'm a programmer, not an operator. I write programs, but I’m not writing data. ”
User : "Yes, I do not ask to stick, pour, you know how to"
Programmer : "And you know how, I wrote to you the processing, there only columns need to choose where the nomenclature is, where the price is"
User : "Yes, I do not remember where she is"
Programmer : “Well, look, a letter from me was like in December”
User : “Listen, I have no time, after an hour meeting on tenders, it is necessary that the data are already in the system. Fill, or I will say that because of you, we have to extend the tender "
Programmer : “Well, you're a beast. Give me your file and get ready for the meeting, I'll tell you everything. ”
So programmers at plants disappear, turning into substitutes. They are friends with bookkeeping and users, help close the month, upload / download files, push exchanges with their hands in all directions, correct the minus in turnover, add regular fields to orders, update releases and ... continue to dream, thank God.
You yourself can add dialogues, we all have seen such sad stories - both in our own and in someone else’s example. If you don't lie to yourself, of course. This is gradual. There is another synonym in this context - routine. Which is known to kill marriage, relationships with children, dreams and personal goals, etc. Everything, I am tying, too sad theme.
The last whale remained - circular responsibility . It is obvious, it happens "somehow it happened." But without it, the surrogate industry will not survive.
Everything that I wrote about the work of the franchise, I wrote about all the franches. This is the result of circular bail.
If you are a customer, you will not find a french that will act differently. Well, that is There are those who are even worse off, but better not. All the same. Competition - only by minor criteria, such as the number of specialists and unconfirmed competencies.
Franchi, of course, found an excuse - vendor. Implementations of 1C programs are obtained as such, because 1C programs are such. Read the holivary on this topic at an affiliate conference, if available. “We earn money for you, and you have made such a bad program, and you are not listening to us!” I do not defend 1C, it does not need it, but, nevertheless, if you pull the head out of the wrong place, you will have to admit that the project’s problem is the project’s problem, i.e. “A temporary enterprise, aimed at creating a unique product, service or result (see PMBOK)”, and not of the software being implemented.
Under circular bail conditions, the main thing is that it is not violated. As soon as at least one franch learns to really achieve the goals of the customer, everyone else will have to develop. And to develop is evil for surrogate manufacturers. Evil fierce, because threatens with the loss of a multimillion-dollar business, because we are talking about the development of hundreds and thousands of people, rebuilding approaches to doing business, processes, project technologies, etc. Even scary to think.
Doesn’t it resemble the notorious state administration?There circular liability is a requirement for employees. Have you ever read the requirements for state officials? I read a few years ago. It is written in black and white - it is forbidden to tell anyone something bad about state administration, the state and other officials. It seems like a litter from the hut not to endure.
But it is not all that bad.This world cannot be rid of surrogates, but you can clear yourself, your team, your department, your company from them. But this is another story, and not one.
It is important to remember the whales - formalism, gradualness, mutual responsibility.
If possible, avoid formalism, especially if you are on fix. There is always a lot of work for a programmer, in any region of the country. Try to do without TZ, without the requirements and papers. Try to reach the goal. Try to understand the goal. Help to understand the goal. Try to do more and better than they demand from you. Increase your horizons and efficiency - this goes beyond the formal requirements for you. Learn new technologies and frameworks.
Remember - the person who came to you (including your leader) is most likely a surrogate himself. And the task brought a surrogate. And the goal he set a surrogate. Help him escape from this circle. Just do not explain anything about surrogates. Nobody likes to hear bad things about themselves.
Do not fall for a gradual transformation into a surrogate, an appendage of the system. If you have a team, talk about the goals - working, personal. If you are a leader, create conditions under which people will talk.
Let's not forget who the programmer is. What are his opportunities, what can he give to business. For the sake of what it all started, and the profession, and this place of work.
If you are a leader, and your people have turned into surrogate substitutes - remember, this is your fault. These are people, not machines and not biomaterial. You are responsible for both their results and their development. Otherwise, you are not a manager, but ashit is a piece of a taxi dispatcher.
And finally, do not give in to mutual responsibility. Do not rely on a technology or solution that everyone called good. Do not miss the decision just because it was called bad. Take time, look, study, form your own opinion.
Remember that the mass, connected by circular bail, says only that which is beneficial for the preservation of circular bail.
Well, the best - break the circular responsibility. In programming and automation, even one person is able to make a revolution. Until.
1. 1C-Franchisee, 1C programmers in general, and almost everything they do;
2. web programmers and companies creating and promoting websites and all products of their work;
3. quality management systems and people who are engaged in their implementation;
4. accountants and accounting;
5. economists with all of their giant ekselevsky footcloths;
6. internal development projects, which it is impossible to look at without tears;
7. Scrum and all these boards on which the same stickers hang for weeks;
8. CBT, after the introduction of which the deficit and illiquid assets become even greater;
9. Controlling, which gives figures later than accounting;
10. KPI, the adequacy of which you have to prove yourself every time they bring these numbers;
11. Motivation systems, which, whatever one may say, “salary + bonus”, though called fashionable words, such as “grade”.
You can continue indefinitely. Have you ever wondered why the business does not like all this? Or did they not even notice that the business does not like this?
')
At the same time, oddly enough, the business likes:
1. increase business profitability through automation;
2. increase in the number of leads and increase in turnover due to proper promotion;
3. improving the quality of production processes and business processes;
4. useful accounting, giving a simple and clear picture of the business in numbers according to the principles of double entry;
5. useful management accounting, giving timely figures and forecasts of the state of the company;
6. effective efficiency improvement projects launched and implemented within the company, with a small budget and competencies stored in the company;
7. improving the efficiency of project or streaming work by 2-4 times;
8. multiple increase in turnover and profits, reduction of all types of stocks, disposal of excess capacity of all types;
9. an accurate management system that timely reacts to deviations and helps to make the right decisions to all participants in the processes;
10. multifaceted, understandable, correctly converging in 1-3 digits the evaluation system of all business areas, giving an assessment of the state of affairs in a few minutes without lengthy meetings and reports;
11. a clear system of measurement and evaluation of human labor, which also performs the function of management, allowing you to disperse half of unnecessary managers who like to “lead with their hands” (= “lead”).
Feel the difference? Or not yet? I specifically made a list of one-to-one, so you can match.
In order to confuse you even more, I’ll add clause 12, which is common to everyone: business loves to read books by various gurus about all the topics listed, the same Gates, Deming, Ono, Goldratt, Sutherland, etc.
Now I am sure you understood everything.
In the books - the original standard. How it should be. For what it was invented. Purpose. What should give automation to business. How is the work on the project 4 times faster? How to make losses from a marriage a probability, not a reality. How to manage a business, spending 20 minutes on it once a month and reading one A4 sheet with three digits. How to increase the turnover at times, just buying only what you need. Who does not like this? And authoritative people write, and in practice everything is checked, and you can go see. Original. Like Mona Lisa in the Louvre, which always has crowds of Chinese and Japanese.
The second list is the mental projections of the original on a particular business. The leader read, was inspired, wanted the same way, looked at his business through the prism of the original, saw the obvious benefits from the changes, formulated a goal.
And here come into action friends from the first list. I do not know the best phraseologism that will describe the first list than “they wanted the best, but it turned out as always.” There is a little less suitable - "we will not catch up, so at least we will get warm."
There is, however, an anti-pattern, I will cite the key quotation: “Our job is to find the most convenient, simple and beautiful way to solve the problem, without losing sense on the way . ” I will not judge how they follow their slogan, but it sounds beautiful.
Enough to beat around the bush, this article is about surrogates and their producers.
A surrogate is when they did not what they asked for. Or not as requested. Or did not do what they asked. Or they did it when they didn't ask.
Surrogates are the most terrible evil that is happening now with Russian business and government. Surrogates - this is the best killer in the world of efficiency. What is especially nice, we, programmers, this time not to the side - we are on the very axis of evil.
You and I have no direct dialogue, and this is wonderful. You do not have to defend, attack and defend. Just think and look around, remember your projects, automated companies, their managers. And try to remember what you said at the first meetings.
I once was 1Sniki. I started working in 2005, immediately with v8 and UPP, so I found a big HYIP automation of industrial enterprises, which was in 2005-2009.
Always - always - the customer wanted the same thing, although he called it in different words. Reduce costs, get numbers in a timely manner, reduce staff, plan everything, see the effectiveness of people, make management decisions based on system data, blah blah blah.
And always - always - the customer received the same thing. The customer has always received the automation of accounting, regl. payroll, the beginnings of CRM, simple accounting management, instructions for working with the Planning Assistant, a bunch of printing plates for all occasions, a bunch of code and updating releases for 100 hours each (until the SCP is not stopped developing), the need to hire a 1C programmer (and better than two) and a bloated staff of accountants, economists and other operators who, together with the 1C programmer, become system appendages.
No, there were, of course, exceptions. I had to write this phrase to soften the wording. But there were no exceptions.
Another industry rich in surrogates is quality management. Surely heard about "the introduction of a quality management system in accordance with international standards ISO 9001". It is almost always a surrogate.
There are exceptions already. For example, a company needs an ISO certificate to participate in a tender. Then everything is fair - you can simply buy a certificate (this is illegal, of course, but it is possible).
But among the managers, romantics who have read somewhere that ISO standards are squeezing best management practices have not been translated; having introduced them in a company, one can seriously increase its competitive advantages, increase the transparency of processes, make measurable results for all consumers, external and internal , declare yourself internationally, blah blah blah. Nothing like?
As a result of the implementation of the ISO standard, nothing good usually happens.
The best option, i.e. the lesser evil is when a small department is created, sometimes from one person, who deals with all these pieces of paper and undergoes recertification. It is just that sometimes he slips the next audit reports, process improvement cards, reports with quality indicators for the quarter, etc., to managers for signing.
The variant is worse - when all these pieces of paper are really embedded in life processes. No one, incl. implementers do not know why these papers are needed in the process. But there is an excuse - this is from the ISO standard. And its developers are so far away that there is no one to ask.
Fortunately, getting rid of the implemented ISO standard is pretty easy, as some already do. Just throw it in the trash and cease to pass certification.
There are lots of less common surrogate manufacturers. This includes most of the business consultants with all their TPS, Scrum, Lean, etc.
About site makers and not worth mentioning. It is enough to remember why they are invited - to increase sales.
Now - about how and why surrogates do appear. They must obey some laws.
The production of surrogates, as a trend, is based on three pillars: formalism, gradualism and collective responsibility .
The main is probably the formalism , you all know about it. This is the first phase of surrogate production. It begins with the phrase “let's fix it on paper now”. So there are all sorts of requirements, contracts, projects, stages, schedules, deadlines. Usually in the project documentation do not forget to mention the purpose of the project - those fantasies that the customer said at the first meeting. But as we know from life, no one then reads the section “Goals”.
The main thing - as soon as possible to transfer attention to the details. To give a person, instead of his goals, the illusion of control - these are the stages, schedules, tasks, you control, we will take you, assign those responsible, let them check everything, adjust the requirements, increase the budget if necessary.
See what happens? Trite - shifting the focus of attention. How often they write in the opposition media, transferring attention from real problems to fictional ones. We create a problem with which you have to mess around a lot, and a person enthusiastically tinkers.
For example, with monitoring the timing of work. This is a favorite business of all managers - to control the timing. And when it comes to a multi-million dollar project, God himself ordered to inflate his cheeks - I’m busy with important business, I’m in control of the timing.
At this stage, the goal of the project generally disappears from view. About her, no one remembers. And the further, the less they will remember.
This was the first stage of the formalism — the substitution of a goal by a list of tasks. A separate, very interesting topic - how do goals turn into tasks? Many books, dissertations, methods (mathematical, statistical, fashion management) have been written on this topic, and it seems that everyone should be able to do this.
And what really? Here in the 1C environment: Franchisee, for example. Coming with the project of introduction to the enterprise, we know in advance what will be implemented there. Listening to the goals of the project is rather a formality. We simply tick the subsystems that are in priority in this enterprise. Well, and those on which you can lay more hours because of the close attention of the management of the enterprise, or (sometimes) unhealthy love for a particular site.
We do not need your goals, buddy. We need your budget, and let's quickly fix it all on paper.
In the process, a smaller formalism is connected - we will not do work beyond the budget, we will not do two interface options, we will not work on performance if it is limited by the platform (and who will check it?).
In the project documentation, in addition to the objectives of the project, written success criteria. It seems the right thing - the formula by which it is estimated whether the project was successful or not.
When it comes to an internal project carried out by employees of the company itself, there is a sense in the criteria. The career of the project manager and key employees depends on them. Made a project to reduce accounting, if in fact the accounting department has declined - hurray, you are a Great Accountant. You are more likely to be entrusted to a cut by economists. Or even offered, maybe they will insist.
And if this is an external project, with a french? Who needs these criteria for success, if all the stages are behind, the acts are signed, the money is paid? Well, the owner probably needs to once again make sure that there is nothing to love 1snikov. And if for the first time with such a collision, then cry and dive into our real world.
Formalism accompanies surrogates everywhere. To see this, you just have to look around.
Look at the state administration. On legislative activities. To your city. On your management company. Try to see a surrogate. By the way, now is the time - soon elections. Who will remember now what goals these goals faced? Not such as “development of the entrusted territory”, but concrete, measurable, understandable. They themselves do not remember. And what will they give you as a result of their work? Yes, anything - what, despite the formalism, they managed to do, even if they did not do it.
They built a kindergarten - this is our result, they will say. What was the goal? Provide all children from 2 years old with kindergartens. How much for this had det.sadov build? 15 let's say And they built one. Surrogate? The stump is clear. He was also built not by the city, but by the developer of the microdistrict, because he had to.
Distracted. The second whale is gradual . Actually, I opened it already, when I talked about formalism.
There is no franchise (although no, there is one), who will say at the first meeting - we write a schedule, spit on your goals, you need to do it this way and that way, as we write it, there will be no changes in the schedule and budget, the project will be 2 specialist and under no circumstances will not be added, ERP, we have no one knows, we will learn at your expense, the portfolio on our site is bullshit, etc.
All this the customer will know in the course of the project, from the first to the last item, plus a dozen more. But he learns gradually, otherwise it will not be possible to produce a surrogate - they just won't let him in.
Graduation is crucial. When used correctly, the vector of the project or product can be gradually rotated 180 degrees and twisted into a snake. In order to feel with all my heart how gradual it is, I strongly recommend choosing the time and watching the film “Dogville” by Lars von Trier. When I was a CIO, this film was a must-see for all subordinate programmers. There, however, the goal was slightly different, smaller.
The film was supposed to show programmers how the “gradual” whale would turn them into surrogates. After all, every programmer in his heart considers himself an architect, a system builder, a business efficiency enhancer. It is without irony - it should be so.
And what happens next with such a romantic?
User : "And help me set up a report ..."
Programmer : “Let me tell you better how to customize reports in general, you can do it yourself”
User : "Yes, now there is no time, the boss is waiting, well, help"
Programmer : "Ok, now"
...
User : "We would set up the distribution of costs, the month does not close"
Programmer : “Well, I’ve shown you how to do it, I did the training, I wrote the instructions.”
User : "Well, something does not work out for us, help, it's hard for you, well, you're a programmer"
Programmer : “No, I won't, I’m not an errand boy, you’re getting paid for it”
User : “We’ll hand over the profits tomorrow, I’ll tell the director that you didn’t help, we'll see later who gets paid for what!”
Programmer : “Okay, for the last time I will help”
...
User : “Listen, we have a new price list with supplier prices, fill in 1C”
Programmer : "Sam zaley"
User : "In the sense of myself? You are a programmer. ”
Programmer : “I'm a programmer, not an operator. I write programs, but I’m not writing data. ”
User : "Yes, I do not ask to stick, pour, you know how to"
Programmer : "And you know how, I wrote to you the processing, there only columns need to choose where the nomenclature is, where the price is"
User : "Yes, I do not remember where she is"
Programmer : “Well, look, a letter from me was like in December”
User : “Listen, I have no time, after an hour meeting on tenders, it is necessary that the data are already in the system. Fill, or I will say that because of you, we have to extend the tender "
Programmer : “Well, you're a beast. Give me your file and get ready for the meeting, I'll tell you everything. ”
So programmers at plants disappear, turning into substitutes. They are friends with bookkeeping and users, help close the month, upload / download files, push exchanges with their hands in all directions, correct the minus in turnover, add regular fields to orders, update releases and ... continue to dream, thank God.
You yourself can add dialogues, we all have seen such sad stories - both in our own and in someone else’s example. If you don't lie to yourself, of course. This is gradual. There is another synonym in this context - routine. Which is known to kill marriage, relationships with children, dreams and personal goals, etc. Everything, I am tying, too sad theme.
The last whale remained - circular responsibility . It is obvious, it happens "somehow it happened." But without it, the surrogate industry will not survive.
Everything that I wrote about the work of the franchise, I wrote about all the franches. This is the result of circular bail.
If you are a customer, you will not find a french that will act differently. Well, that is There are those who are even worse off, but better not. All the same. Competition - only by minor criteria, such as the number of specialists and unconfirmed competencies.
Franchi, of course, found an excuse - vendor. Implementations of 1C programs are obtained as such, because 1C programs are such. Read the holivary on this topic at an affiliate conference, if available. “We earn money for you, and you have made such a bad program, and you are not listening to us!” I do not defend 1C, it does not need it, but, nevertheless, if you pull the head out of the wrong place, you will have to admit that the project’s problem is the project’s problem, i.e. “A temporary enterprise, aimed at creating a unique product, service or result (see PMBOK)”, and not of the software being implemented.
Under circular bail conditions, the main thing is that it is not violated. As soon as at least one franch learns to really achieve the goals of the customer, everyone else will have to develop. And to develop is evil for surrogate manufacturers. Evil fierce, because threatens with the loss of a multimillion-dollar business, because we are talking about the development of hundreds and thousands of people, rebuilding approaches to doing business, processes, project technologies, etc. Even scary to think.
Doesn’t it resemble the notorious state administration?There circular liability is a requirement for employees. Have you ever read the requirements for state officials? I read a few years ago. It is written in black and white - it is forbidden to tell anyone something bad about state administration, the state and other officials. It seems like a litter from the hut not to endure.
But it is not all that bad.This world cannot be rid of surrogates, but you can clear yourself, your team, your department, your company from them. But this is another story, and not one.
It is important to remember the whales - formalism, gradualness, mutual responsibility.
If possible, avoid formalism, especially if you are on fix. There is always a lot of work for a programmer, in any region of the country. Try to do without TZ, without the requirements and papers. Try to reach the goal. Try to understand the goal. Help to understand the goal. Try to do more and better than they demand from you. Increase your horizons and efficiency - this goes beyond the formal requirements for you. Learn new technologies and frameworks.
Remember - the person who came to you (including your leader) is most likely a surrogate himself. And the task brought a surrogate. And the goal he set a surrogate. Help him escape from this circle. Just do not explain anything about surrogates. Nobody likes to hear bad things about themselves.
Do not fall for a gradual transformation into a surrogate, an appendage of the system. If you have a team, talk about the goals - working, personal. If you are a leader, create conditions under which people will talk.
Let's not forget who the programmer is. What are his opportunities, what can he give to business. For the sake of what it all started, and the profession, and this place of work.
If you are a leader, and your people have turned into surrogate substitutes - remember, this is your fault. These are people, not machines and not biomaterial. You are responsible for both their results and their development. Otherwise, you are not a manager, but a
And finally, do not give in to mutual responsibility. Do not rely on a technology or solution that everyone called good. Do not miss the decision just because it was called bad. Take time, look, study, form your own opinion.
Remember that the mass, connected by circular bail, says only that which is beneficial for the preservation of circular bail.
Well, the best - break the circular responsibility. In programming and automation, even one person is able to make a revolution. Until.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/344844/
All Articles