X : What do you think about direct human computer interfaces?
Me : I'm not sure what you mean. Are we talking mind reading?
X : Yes
Me : Let's get past conversational programming first. There's a long way to go ... many decades.
X : But don't you think it could be the next step?
Me : Humans have spent hundreds of thousands of years talking to each other. Except in niche cases (pre-existing conditions through birth, illness or accident) then let us concentrate on solving for the existing state.
X : I thought you were against the verbal path i.e. maps?
Me : We create a map and all sit around in silence looking at it whilst goodness flows over us ... err, no. Conversation is an important part of mapping. I'm less inclined towards stories when you could use a map.
X : But you could read the map directly from the mind.
Me : Hmmm, we barely understand how to map a competitive environment. We certainly don't understand the implications of reading thoughts - how humans would react. You want to mix both of these together? Really?
Me : A better path for now is to draw the map and discuss with others. The mind reading stuff belongs in science fiction for the moment. Always worth researching, not worth getting carried away with ... lots of failure down that path.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
It amazes me that the most important metrics (lines of code, story points, cycle time, devex satisfaction) in development are the two that are never discussed, let alone measured ... mean time to answer (mttA) and mean time to question (mttQ).
Whenever we start with building a system or managing a legacy environment, we need to ask questions and get answers. Those are skills which can be hindered or supported by the toolset around you ...
... in the very worst cases, engineers are forced into reading code to try and understand a system. Upto 50% of development time can be spent on reading code ... a process we never question or optimise. That is madness.
X : Thoughts on a return to office policy?
Me : It happens for two basic reasons:- 1) loss of status symbols (top floor office etc). Many execs need these to say "I'm the boss" 2) headcount reduction (i.e. people will leave) due to a weakness in the finances.
Why?
X : What about productivity and innovation?
Me : Those are "reasons" given but they're all bogus and don't stand up to scrutiny. However, there is a third.
X : Colloboration?
Me : Stranded assets - offices etc. No exec likes looking at an empty building they spent £300M on.
X : Basically - status symbols, weaknesses of finances and political capital?
Me : Sounds about right.
X : Did you see Amazon has a return to office policy -
Me : Oh. That's concerning.geekwire.com/2024/survey-by…
X : Our strategy doesn't align with our business.
Me : How do you mean?
X : We create these strategy documents but they never really get implemented as the day to day business takes over.
Me : That's common. Can I ask a question?
X : Sure
Me : ...
Me : Do you map?
X : I've heard of your technique but we don't use it.
Me : Ok, so your business operations is not based upon a map of the landscape?
X : No
Me : And your strategy is not based upon a map of the landscape?
X : No
Me : What made you think they would align?
X : They are supposed to align and we wrote our strategy on our understanding of the business.
Me : Your wrote your strategy based upon stories. There's no means to create a consensus of your landscape, to challenge what your are doing. There is no mechanism for alignment.
X : Why do you continue to use twitter / X?
Me : Because I like the tool and the crowd.
X : Do you support @elonmusk
Me : No. I disagree on many of his views.
X : He is far right.
Me : Perspective matters. US is generally more right wing & Silicon Valley especially so.
X : What do you mean by "Perspective matters"?
Me : Elon's views are not that unusual for Silicon Valley - . There's a lot of support based upon a different view of economics and government.
X : Different?
Me : Different from Europe. cbsnews.com/news/trump-jd-…
X : People should just accept it?
Me : No. They should argue against it. The "left" did itself no favours by diluting its voice across multiple platforms.
X : Are you left?
Me : I view the market as tool to be used in the common interest of society. I'm a socialist.
X : What do you need to do in order to map a business?
Me : Ask ... 1) "Who are the users?" (at the least, include consumers and the business) 2) "What are their needs?" 3) "What is the chain of components required to meet those needs?" 4) "How evolved are those components?"
...
Me : Once you have done that, allow others to challenge it. Even better, build the map with others. It really is that simple.
X : But creating a map is difficult.
Me : Only to those used to making decisions without understanding users, needs, the supply chain etc.
X : How common is that?
Me : In business? The majority of decisions tend to be made with no understanding of users, needs, supply chain and how evolved those components are. We tend to rely on gut feel and stories with little to no effective challenge.
dX: How do you deal with strategy?
Me: First, we need to answer the Where question, which depends a lot on the what and why.
dX: And?
Me: Ok, some very simple steps ...
Step 1: Visualise your environment. That means getting people to discuss, collaborate & challenge in order to create a "good enough" map of your environment. Should be a couple of hours.
Step 2: Look at what's changing which is competitor moves, your moves & economic patterns.
Step 3: Using the map, determine where you could invest/focus on. You're not making a decision yet, you just want the options. By now, you could have spent four hours on the exercise.
Step 4: Decide where you should invest i.e. look at the options using why & what