Hacker News Reader

Comment by ricardobeat | Hacker News Reader

Do you really see the army as a reference in management? Focus on discipline, strict hierarchies and codes doesn't do much good for most software businesses.

And yes, you can learn it. Every profession that involves people has it's dose of "magic" that you must grasp - project management isn't special. Ask a teacher.

View on HN

There's a book on how the marines does management called Corps Business [1], it makes a pretty decent argument for implementing some stuff from the armed forces, eg. adaption, steering by objective, breeding culture etc. It was a while since I read it, but I remember that I thought it was a decent book sans some needless glorification of the marine corps.

[1] http://www.amazon.com/Corps-Business-Management-Principles-M...

The military doesn't work like you think it does

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Corporal#Strategic_Co...

yes. the army of today has progressed a lot. lead by objective, after action reviews - most companies do not implement these techniques as they are too disruptive.

even better: maneuvers. exactly which companies 'train' things? a roll out? a disaster recovery? you fight as you train.

When I was working as a technology manager for the Winter Olympics in Vancouver, we had what were called technical rehearsals. These were simulations of Games-time trouble scenarios to test and improve our systems and processes. It was one of the most nerve-wracking/stressful experiences I've ever had. You could essentially liken them to maneuvers the military uses to train for real battle. The result was that I was much more prepared for the real Olympics, and felt confident to handle almost any disaster situation within my area of responsibility. The same for almost everyone else in the technology department.

I do realize this type of thing is rare though in most settings. For the Olympics (and I think most big events), technical rehearsal is a staple exercise because you get only one chance to make it right and the world is watching.

Not even inn leadership one my think (the army as an example, I mean), but in terms of management of large organisations, yes armed forces (as long as they are used from time to time, so NOT the germen ones) or the roman catholic church are pretty good examples. For leadership, you rather go look somewhere else for examples.

particularly in leadership, why would you single that one out?

squad leaders, platoon leaders, up to officers - they all lead people. all they rely on is their people. if you are out there in afghanistan all that can save your life is your people.

the days of WWI style large-scale battles are long over. ever talked to veterans? most i talked to confessed that it is pretty likely that more officers died by 'friendly fire' than enemy contact. if you suck as a leader in war, feedback is pretty direct.

the modern army is the outcome of a lot of field testing. it is a learning organization, they employ their own historians to assess past activities and learn from them.

leaders are actually being trained in leadership. practical training, you get your own team in a controlled environment and then exercise with them. which organization has such a process?

i particularly like the AAR. not even SCRUM has such a feedback loop, nothing is learned.

Maybe I should have been clearer on that point. Yes, the leadership you mention certainly is there and hopefully good (I'm not american and didn't serve). What I meant was more the fact there arose quite some incidents where the leadership aparently failed. Not in a combat situation, mind that, but rather in a global scope, allowing the burning of korans for example isn't best pratice.

I don't want to into a political discussion so, it really is just an example.

A good sprint retrospective in Scrum should be similar to what I've read about After Action Reviews (AAR).

One the dust settles, spend time to figure out what went well, what can be improved, and what the on-going issues are. They both seem like decent continuous improvement vehicles to me.

what's really great about the AAR process in the military is that it is set up as an open forum, where rank does not apply. it is time-limited, to be done right after the exercise. it is highly focused, not a bitching session.

see this pdf for details: http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/army/tc_25-20/tc25-20.pd...

That's the description of an ideal sprint review.

The army, the Catholic church and a successful software company have very different jobs to do, under very different circumstances. It's no surprise that they are organized very differently. Trying to model any of them on the organization of either of the other two will not produce good results.

In th end, yes. But all three face the common task of organizing trully global organizations with thousands of peoples spread all over the place. It doesn't matter if you programming software, preaching to the world of fighting wars. AFAIK there were even books written about the lessons one take from the organization of the church.

The point I wanted to make is, that you can learn from everyone even if it's from a different sector. As far as the church goes, you clearly see the old roman heritage.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com