Welcome!

Java IoT Authors: Yeshim Deniz, Zakia Bouachraoui, Elizabeth White, Pat Romanski, Liz McMillan

Related Topics: @DevOpsSummit, Java IoT, Agile Computing

@DevOpsSummit: Blog Feed Post

Who Is Responsible for “Good Code”? By @daedtech | @DevOpsSummit #DevOps

Typically, managers will rely at least in part on results and observable behaviors

Who Is Responsible for "Good Code"?
by Erik Dietrich

A few weeks back, I wrote a post about getting ready to address a coworker's bad code.  This sparked some conversation across various media, including the following interesting question:

...seems that there is a breakdown in managing the development process. Why is Bob allowed [to keep] writing bad code?

Measuring Developers
This feedback is interesting enough to merit a blog post in and of itself. I recognize a question that cuts to the heart of a software development conundrum when I see it.  The structure of most organizations that employ software developers is this: the developers responsible for code report up through a structure of people that don't.  To put it another way, the people responsible for personnel management usually don't understand how to evaluate the work of those reporting to them - at least not directly.

Even if people with titles such as "Director of Software Engineering" or "Development Manager" had been developers at some point, asking them to perform code reviews isn't a solid approach.  It wouldn't scale well.  Imagine asking someone to do detailed code reviews with seven or eight people while also doing all of the other things a manager is required to do, such as budgeting, dealing with other departments, worrying about software licensing, etc.  And that's even assuming they're technical. Most managers have to squint pretty hard into their rear view mirrors to see the last time they wrote a lot of code, if there ever was a time.

Typically, managers will rely at least in part on results and observable behaviors.  Does the developer keep long hours?  Does the developer take one for the team?  Did the developer heroically work 90 hours last week to get the code out on time?  Did the developer fix a lot of bugs, or better yet, write code in which not a lot of bugs were reported?

All of that sounds reasonable until you think of technical debt.  "Technical debt" is a term that describes a trade: when you take shortcuts in the code in order to ship today, it's at the cost of having a mess when you try to ship down the line. For a great visual of this, imagine a child tasked with cleaning his room who simply stuffs all of the clutter and food debris under the bed.  In this light, the very developers that managers view as effective may be writing awful code and making a mess.  Tired developers, working 90 hour weeks, are almost certainly thrashing in a tech debt cycle - making heroic efforts to overcome problems that they created in the first place by making a mess.

It's hard for a manager to make any form of direct evaluation, even when it seems as though there are easy ones to be made.

Metrics to the Rescue?
Okay, so they can't make direct evaluations.  What about indirect ones?  Well, those are tricky as well.  One of the most common traps for software management, particularly if it's not terribly mature, is the allure of metrics.  Perhaps you've heard calls for a team build that reports unit test coverage, method size, or cyclomatic complexity?  If a manager could get access to those statistics, the reasoning goes  he/she could know who on the team was writing good code and who wasn't.

Be careful what you measure.  It's possible to achieve a high degree of unit test coverage by writing test methods that don't assert anything.  You can keep method size under control by having classes with thousands of tiny methods.  Perhaps the most iconic example of unintended consequences for measuring developer productivity is the mountains of terrible code that resulted from managers, at one time, trying to measure developer productivity in lines of committed code.  Metrics are tempting for managers, but there be dragons.  Relying on metrics to measure developer effectiveness has not historically been a path to success.

Measurement via Human?
If the managers who make personnel decisions can't rely on themselves to evaluate developers and they can't rely on machines to do it, what choice is left?  Clearly, they're going to have to turn to other humans to do this.  Common patterns that you see are the appointment of a trusted advisor in the form of someone with a title like "Architect" or "Tech Lead." Or perhaps they take a more egalitarian approach, like having the developers perform peer reviews or pair program.  In this fashion, the manager delegates evaluation to people in a position to do it, and she uses the information they furnish to make decisions.

This is a familiar pattern, and I imagine that you might be nodding right now.  But, going back to the original question, what if Bob-the one checking in the bad code-is a senior team member or even the architect?  Think it's not possible?  It happens all the time.  Check out the popularity of this post, describing a phenomenon many people seem to identify with. A manager trusting an advisor will introduce one check and balance, but it's hardly foolproof.  It gets better when there is regular peer review and pairing.  More checks, more balances, more eyes, and more voices.

But guess what?  If we eliminate all evaluation options for managers with the exception of presiding over a team with extensive peer review, we're back to square one.  It's going to be up to a member of the team without any authority over Bob to let Bob know that he needs to improve his code.  It's going to take conversations, persuasion, and collaboration, as opposed to management cracking the whip and sizing people up.

In the end, there's only one reliable way for management to ensure that there aren't Bobs out there, writing bad code indefinitely without feedback.  They need to create a collaborative culture of positive feedback and trust so that the team of humans they're managing take care of one another and spur each other on toward improvement.  Bob's bad code is the team's bad code, not management's.  And the team, not management, needs to own the code.

Read the original blog entry...

More Stories By SmartBear Blog

As the leader in software quality tools for the connected world, SmartBear supports more than two million software professionals and over 25,000 organizations in 90 countries that use its products to build and deliver the world’s greatest applications. With today’s applications deploying on mobile, Web, desktop, Internet of Things (IoT) or even embedded computing platforms, the connected nature of these applications through public and private APIs presents a unique set of challenges for developers, testers and operations teams. SmartBear's software quality tools assist with code review, functional and load testing, API readiness as well as performance monitoring of these modern applications.

IoT & Smart Cities Stories
René Bostic is the Technical VP of the IBM Cloud Unit in North America. Enjoying her career with IBM during the modern millennial technological era, she is an expert in cloud computing, DevOps and emerging cloud technologies such as Blockchain. Her strengths and core competencies include a proven record of accomplishments in consensus building at all levels to assess, plan, and implement enterprise and cloud computing solutions. René is a member of the Society of Women Engineers (SWE) and a m...
Andrew Keys is Co-Founder of ConsenSys Enterprise. He comes to ConsenSys Enterprise with capital markets, technology and entrepreneurial experience. Previously, he worked for UBS investment bank in equities analysis. Later, he was responsible for the creation and distribution of life settlement products to hedge funds and investment banks. After, he co-founded a revenue cycle management company where he learned about Bitcoin and eventually Ethereal. Andrew's role at ConsenSys Enterprise is a mul...
In his general session at 19th Cloud Expo, Manish Dixit, VP of Product and Engineering at Dice, discussed how Dice leverages data insights and tools to help both tech professionals and recruiters better understand how skills relate to each other and which skills are in high demand using interactive visualizations and salary indicator tools to maximize earning potential. Manish Dixit is VP of Product and Engineering at Dice. As the leader of the Product, Engineering and Data Sciences team at D...
Dynatrace is an application performance management software company with products for the information technology departments and digital business owners of medium and large businesses. Building the Future of Monitoring with Artificial Intelligence. Today we can collect lots and lots of performance data. We build beautiful dashboards and even have fancy query languages to access and transform the data. Still performance data is a secret language only a couple of people understand. The more busine...
Nicolas Fierro is CEO of MIMIR Blockchain Solutions. He is a programmer, technologist, and operations dev who has worked with Ethereum and blockchain since 2014. His knowledge in blockchain dates to when he performed dev ops services to the Ethereum Foundation as one the privileged few developers to work with the original core team in Switzerland.
Whenever a new technology hits the high points of hype, everyone starts talking about it like it will solve all their business problems. Blockchain is one of those technologies. According to Gartner's latest report on the hype cycle of emerging technologies, blockchain has just passed the peak of their hype cycle curve. If you read the news articles about it, one would think it has taken over the technology world. No disruptive technology is without its challenges and potential impediments t...
If a machine can invent, does this mean the end of the patent system as we know it? The patent system, both in the US and Europe, allows companies to protect their inventions and helps foster innovation. However, Artificial Intelligence (AI) could be set to disrupt the patent system as we know it. This talk will examine how AI may change the patent landscape in the years to come. Furthermore, ways in which companies can best protect their AI related inventions will be examined from both a US and...
Bill Schmarzo, Tech Chair of "Big Data | Analytics" of upcoming CloudEXPO | DXWorldEXPO New York (November 12-13, 2018, New York City) today announced the outline and schedule of the track. "The track has been designed in experience/degree order," said Schmarzo. "So, that folks who attend the entire track can leave the conference with some of the skills necessary to get their work done when they get back to their offices. It actually ties back to some work that I'm doing at the University of San...
When talking IoT we often focus on the devices, the sensors, the hardware itself. The new smart appliances, the new smart or self-driving cars (which are amalgamations of many ‘things'). When we are looking at the world of IoT, we should take a step back, look at the big picture. What value are these devices providing. IoT is not about the devices, its about the data consumed and generated. The devices are tools, mechanisms, conduits. This paper discusses the considerations when dealing with the...
Bill Schmarzo, author of "Big Data: Understanding How Data Powers Big Business" and "Big Data MBA: Driving Business Strategies with Data Science," is responsible for setting the strategy and defining the Big Data service offerings and capabilities for EMC Global Services Big Data Practice. As the CTO for the Big Data Practice, he is responsible for working with organizations to help them identify where and how to start their big data journeys. He's written several white papers, is an avid blogge...