Updated the post accordingly and also covered the Goodhart's law concern.
314 karma · joined October 11, 2014
First of all, this isn't based on Scrum at all (I'm not a fan of Scrum, especially, because it's implemented incorrectly in 99% of the places). It's based on XP instead.
Re (1), the teams I'm dealing with are highly collaborative, which means that they pair or mob almost all the time. The reason is that their development process is highly optimised for that (it's faster to deliver something in pair than to do it solo). If the schedule isn't the same for the whole team, and people take lunch at different time, that significantly reduces the availability of people for collaboration, making the whole approach less effective.
Re (2), this works because the PM and EM are also both collaboratively working with the team on the ground as ICs (their % is just a bit different, for example, EM's distribution is 60% IC work and 40% mgmt work - this is because there is a limit to maximum number of direct reports = 6. EM that works with the team on the ground is most effective, because they have significantly more knowledge than the EM that is "in the clouds or in the ivory tower"). Furthermore, the teams have the autonomy to adjust this blueprint via the retrospective (aka reflection workshop) their own process and way of working. What I've seen happen often, is that another developer joins pre-IPMs together with EM — that developer is usually the person who is pairing with the EM on that day. The benefit of this is that everyone gets to participate in the process of refining work items, however, it still maintains the concept of minimum-viable audience wasting minimum possible time.
On top of this, some of the refinement of known & unknown unknowns is actually done via work items, such as exploratory charters and spikes by the team itself. It's just done not in a meeting, but as normal focus or collaborative work. Based on that then appropriate work item(s) can be created to deliver the valuable outcome.
Re (3), Daily planning is not like scrum stand-up, sorry. The purpose of daily planning is to plan the day: that involves who will pair with whom today, and what are the most important things to do or deliver today. And it does have a kanban board where everyone sees the status of items. Usually, people resolve their blockers on their own, via collaboration, or via talking to people, when they arise. However, there is also benefit in trying to fight with the challenging problem for couple more hours and don't call for help immediately (that's how people learn after all). So struggling with the blocker until next morning can actually be beneficial.
Re (4), Yes, I've successfully implemented this is smaller organisations of 10-100 people. I have confidence that it can work beyond that, but, of course, some changes would need to be applied. There is no "silo"edness in the organisations like this because of their high level of collaboration. It's not unlikely to see a pair of developers mobbing with client services, sales, marketing or finance, delivering immense value directly. A few times it was also possible to have "Customer on-Site" which means developers "dabbling" and "prototyping" with the customer or end-user directly.
Re (big picture), I have gripes with synchrony vs. asynchrony. Instead of embracing the asynchronous work — I do the opposite, embrace the synchronous work. There are many more advantages when it's done well, and sync and collocated work has much higher maximum potential for valuable outcomes than async non-collocated one. The reason for this is that it can remove much more wait times and work-in-progress waste from the system, and async non-collocated work increases the number of these. They are detrimental to the flow of value and throughput.
There are few more like that on the internets.
If everybody thought about "just ending in a coffin and everything is pointless", humanity would've ceased existence long time ago.
--
My best time investment was investing in my discipline by training to wake up at the same time in the morning and doing morning exercise on alarm.
My most horrible time waster was watching Netflix. Since the past few months, I've canceled it, and now I have much more time to invest in myself.
If you want to have static requirements (or changing once per 5-10y), then that’s what you have _hardware_ for.
Software has “soft” in the name for that exact reason.
Embrace the constant change.
2. I have made it available without signup/login (partially—you’ll see companies/locations and how many entries they have each, and be able to navigate to these company pages, but from there to see numbers, you’d need to signup/login).
What’s important is that I’m not going to see the numbers you entered.
Also, since I’m verifying every registration (in half-automated/half-manual way), and it takes about 20 seconds to do the verification, I cannot possibly remember who I’ve seen and what profiles do they have. (simply because I’m human).
Additionally, what is important is for what purposes you allow me to process your data. And the only purpose for this LinkedIn data is to verify your company name, job title, and location. Once that is done, the data gets removed or disassociated from your account, which means that it can no longer be meaningfully processed (anonymized), and since I don’t have your permission to do any other types of processing—I won’t.
EDIT: So what is anonymous are the salary numbers—and that is what I’m talking about on the landing page.
Now, I’m including most special characters, so it should work.
PS: Also, the pre-flight validation now includes special character check too, so you can see the validity real-time instead of after you submit. (This check was not originally included on the client-side, only on the server).
Maybe pi-hole doesn’t like "cookie-banner" class/id of the cookie banner component?
EDIT: there are some default landen.co scripts (for landing page only), but they are fairly standard and shouldn’t be invasive for some extensions to block them…
I’d rather spend 10h a day 7 days a week pouring efforts into my own assets, or towards my vision, and not for someone else’s assets or vision, especially if I have no say and stake in the high level decisions (like sale of the company).
Or is it just additional features of the platform without altering the review data?
Also, I hate ads too.
For this business domain, that leaves a business model where "power users" of the product can get more features, or more access, or more detailed data for a premium fee.
Are there even more alternatives? What do you think?
Also, if rejected registration is not updated with correct info in 1 week, it gets automatically deleted. This data does not become part of the information that other users can see.
> Browsing companies to see if I recognize any in my area would be a good feature.
You are not the first asking for that today. I’ll implement this feature for the next release.
> the only reason I added my information was to see if there was anything relevant
That also screams like a missing feature for me. I could allow people to browse companies (by location) and show masked data until they sign up and share their own entry.
And I do believe that every company needs to get very transparent on how they decide the salary, when they pay someone differently. There should be a well-designed set of rules and processes to follow. This way, people who want to earn more, know exactly what to do and in which direction should they grow and develop. Also, if they think that this direction doesn’t align with their personal goals, they can make a better decision about joining another company, where interests will align better.
I validate the information (current job title, company name and location) via user’s LinkedIn profile manually.
I don’t validate the "numbers", but I plan to implement an algorithm that’ll mark "suspicious" entries, and will hide them or delete them from the system. Additionally, owners of such records will be prompted to update them when they log in into the system next time.
What do you think should this QR code lead to?
Salary information of one particular person (that put the QR code in the room)? Or salaries of group of people who work there?
On the other hand, I wanted to be super-transparent with my users.
Because, I still see a lot of websites out there having "necessary" cookies, and website works without accepting the popup, and users unknowingly accept "by default" a lot of third-party tracking cookies, which makes me sad :(
I have coded my own cookie banner and didn’t use any of the existing tools out there. That’s why I’m surprised if something is blocking it, but there was already another comment about the same as well.
This is to be honest, weird thing for adblocker to do—to block legitimate cookie banner.
And yes, website is not going to work until the required cookie is accepted (my backend rejects requests when they don’t specify that the necessary cookie consent was given).
Then the password requirements are strong because it is used for encryption of your critical private data in the system. The same reason is why you need to login with your account ID (email) and password.