<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><channel><title>Engineering Empathy on Brave New Geek</title><link>https://bravenewgeek.com/tag/engineering-empathy/</link><description>Recent content in Engineering Empathy on Brave New Geek</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Dec 2020 11:23:20 -0500</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://bravenewgeek.com/tag/engineering-empathy/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Scaling DevOps and the Revival of Operations</title><link>https://bravenewgeek.com/scaling-devops-and-the-revival-of-operations/</link><pubDate>Wed, 18 Apr 2018 10:07:42 -0500</pubDate><guid>https://bravenewgeek.com/scaling-devops-and-the-revival-of-operations/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;Operations is going through a renaissance right now. With the move to cloud, the increasing amount of automation, and the increasing &lt;em&gt;importance&lt;/em&gt; of automation, Ops as we know it is reinventing itself out of necessity. Infrastructure is becoming more and more sophisticated—and commoditized—and practices are just now starting to grow up around that. So while some worry about robots taking our jobs, the reality is more about how automation will help augment us to build better software and focus on higher-value things. It’s not so much about the &lt;em&gt;distant&lt;/em&gt; future—whatever that may hold—so much as it is about the next five to ten years, what Operations looks like in that timeframe, and why I think it has to retool.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>Software Is About Storytelling</title><link>https://bravenewgeek.com/software-is-about-storytelling/</link><pubDate>Wed, 04 Oct 2017 17:20:59 -0500</pubDate><guid>https://bravenewgeek.com/software-is-about-storytelling/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;Software engineering is more a practice in archeology than it is in building. As an industry, we undervalue storytelling and focus too much on artifacts and tools and deliverables. How many times have you been left scratching your head while looking at a piece of code, system, or process? It’s the &lt;em&gt;story&lt;/em&gt;, the legacy left behind by that artifact, that is just as important—if not &lt;em&gt;more—than&lt;/em&gt; the artifact itself.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;And I don’t mean what’s in the version control history—that’s often useless. I mean the real, &lt;em&gt;human&lt;/em&gt; story behind something. Artifacts, whether that’s code or tools or something else entirely, are not just snapshots in time. They’re the result of a series of decisions, discussions, mistakes, corrections, problems, constraints, and so on.  They’re the product of the engineering process, but the problem is they usually don’t capture that process in its entirety. They rarely capture it &lt;em&gt;at all&lt;/em&gt;. They commonly end up being nothing &lt;em&gt;but&lt;/em&gt; a snapshot in time.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>Engineering Empathy</title><link>https://bravenewgeek.com/engineering-empathy/</link><pubDate>Sat, 03 Jun 2017 18:17:06 -0500</pubDate><guid>https://bravenewgeek.com/engineering-empathy/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;This was a talk I gave at an internal R&amp;amp;D conference my last week at Workiva. I got a lot of positive feedback on the talk, so I figured I would share it with a wider audience. Be warned: it’s long. Feel free to read each section separately, though they largely tie together.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Why do you work where you work? For many in tech, the answer is probably &lt;em&gt;culture&lt;/em&gt;. When you tell a friend about your job, the culture is probably the first thing you describe. It’s culture that can be a company’s biggest asset—and &lt;a href="https://www.recode.net/2017/2/19/14665076/ubers-travis-kalanick-susan-fowler-sexual-harassment-investigation"&gt;its biggest downfall&lt;/a&gt;. But what &lt;em&gt;is&lt;/em&gt; it?&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>The Future of Ops</title><link>https://bravenewgeek.com/the-future-of-ops/</link><pubDate>Wed, 03 May 2017 20:12:57 -0500</pubDate><guid>https://bravenewgeek.com/the-future-of-ops/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;Traditional Operations isn’t going away, it’s just retooling. The move from on-premise to cloud means Ops, in the classical sense, is largely being outsourced to cloud providers. This is the buzzword-compliant &lt;em&gt;NoOps movement&lt;/em&gt;, of which many call the “successor” to DevOps, though that word has become &lt;a href="https://medium.com/@cindysridharan/what-is-devops-5b0181fdb953"&gt;pretty diluted&lt;/a&gt; these days. What this leaves is a thin but crucial slice between Amazon and the products built by development teams, encompassing infrastructure automation, deployment automation, configuration management, log management, and monitoring and instrumentation.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>Pain-Driven Development: Why Greedy Algorithms Are Bad for Engineering Orgs</title><link>https://bravenewgeek.com/pain-driven-development-why-greedy-algorithms-are-bad-for-engineering-orgs/</link><pubDate>Fri, 07 Apr 2017 15:33:00 -0500</pubDate><guid>https://bravenewgeek.com/pain-driven-development-why-greedy-algorithms-are-bad-for-engineering-orgs/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;I recently wrote about the importance of understanding &lt;a href="https://bravenewgeek.com/decision-impact/"&gt;decision impact&lt;/a&gt; and why it’s important for building an empathetic engineering culture. I presented the distinction between &lt;em&gt;pain displacement&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;pain deferral&lt;/em&gt;, and this was something I wanted to expand on a bit.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;When you distill it down, I think what’s at the heart of a lot of engineering orgs is this idea of “pain-driven development.” When a company grows to a certain size, it develops limbs, and each of these limbs has its own pain receptors. This is when empathy becomes important because it becomes harder and less natural. These limbs of course are teams or, more generally speaking, silos. Teams have a natural tendency to operate in a way that minimizes the amount of pain they feel.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>Decision Impact</title><link>https://bravenewgeek.com/decision-impact/</link><pubDate>Wed, 05 Apr 2017 19:53:34 -0500</pubDate><guid>https://bravenewgeek.com/decision-impact/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;I think a critical part of building an empathetic engineering culture is understanding &lt;em&gt;decision impact&lt;/em&gt;. This is a blindspot that I see happening a lot: a deliberate effort to understand the effects caused by a decision. How does adopting X affect operations? Does our dev tooling support this? Is this architecture supported by our current infrastructure? What are the compliance or security implications of this? Will this scale in production? A particular decision might save you time, but does it create work or slow others down? Are we just &lt;em&gt;displacing&lt;/em&gt; pain somewhere else?&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>Shit Rolls Downhill</title><link>https://bravenewgeek.com/shit-rolls-downhill/</link><pubDate>Thu, 14 Apr 2016 10:43:09 -0500</pubDate><guid>https://bravenewgeek.com/shit-rolls-downhill/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;Building software of significant complexity is tough because a lot of pieces have to come together and a lot of teams have to work in concert to be successful. It can be extraordinarily difficult to get everyone on the same page and moving in tandem toward a common goal. Product development is largely an &lt;a href="https://bravenewgeek.com/product-development-is-a-trust-fall/"&gt;exercise in trust&lt;/a&gt; (or perhaps more accurately, &lt;em&gt;hiring&lt;/em&gt;), but even if you have the “right” people—people you can trust and depend on to get things done—you’re only halfway there.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>