Thoughts from a Thirsty Bear

 ...and they can generate bad code far faster than any human... In case you've missed it, there's is a new buzzword going around. Artificial Intelligence, aka "AI". If you believe the hype, these clever little learning programs are the solution to everything, from creating fine art to curing cancer, to writing software. They vacuum in existing data (the 'training set'), then use this knowledge dump to decide how to solve problems they are given. " It writes code? Great! ", I can hear you say. " I can use this to write my code faster! ". Certainly this is a comment I am hearing from managers, and also inexperienced developers. Not so fast, folks... Several experienced developers, including myself, have been poking around these code generation tools to see if they live up to the hype. I can assure you they don't. I am not an AI expert, but I strongly suspect that this is a function of how these tools work. Think about it - the learning ne

Customer feedback. We all know we need it to make sure we are delivering the right thing. But sometimes we all have trouble engaging. The customer might be busy, or disinterested, or both. So here's a little tip that might just help. Like all the best stories, this happened a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away....  We were working on a web front end and associated backend system for a client. But we were suffering from the "disengaged  customer" anti pattern. The customer would not commit to a web front end design, and help us design the look and feel needed for the application. We provided a few options over a couple of iterations to try and start the design conversation, but none connected despite our efforts. So we threw in a " smelly sock ". Something so stinky it guaranteed to get folks going " Ewwww! Get that out of here!". I seem to remember we disabled all CSS formatting.... Sure enough, we got a reaction during the regular show-and-tell s

Bill Gates chose to open his 2013 TED talk with the words  "Everyone needs a coach" . Someone to provide feedback, and help them see how others see them. True enough - I have helped many people over the years understand themselves, how they interact with others, and how they can resolve inner conflicts and improve. For me, being an effective personal coach is one part of providing quality leadership to companies, and was one reason I went on the Barefoot coaching course a while back. But let's zoom out, and look at the next level in the software industry, specifically the delivery teams. These folks should be the powerhouse of any company, turning customer needs and ideas into reality that can be assessed for usefulness, and ultimately value (whatever that is - value can take many forms. Maybe a subject to explore another day).  However, in companies I work with I am seeing a problem with many of these powerhouses. Something that I suspect is rapidly becoming a  BIG prob

Established companies today are facing many problems. Recovering from the Covid pandemic. Adapting (or otherwise) to remote working. Keeping up with younger, smaller, faster competitors that seem to be able to adapt much more readily to today’s VUCA environment. The list seems to be endless. To do this, many are changing the way they work - they are undergoing transformation . But…many have a problem… I give you the Pitts Power Paradox of Organisational Transformation! (Not exactly a snappy title, granted). Let me explain. Having been involved in many of these transformations where ‘traditional’ companies are attempting to change the way they do business, I am seeing a common pattern of failure. They ignore one fundamental issue that can be summed up in a single quote: “ All organisations are perfectly designed to get the results they get. ” - Arthur W. Jones Every organisation already has a system in place - a way of working - that gets precisely the existing results. To change the r

  Well, it has been a rollercoaster ride on Twitter, arguably the most popular microblogging site ever for a long time. Most recently it has been bought by a billionaire who seems to have a flair for destroying the brand. With the removal of effective moderation, and subsequent deterioration in interactions especially towards minority groups, as well as the truly abysmal treatment of the Twitter staff since the takeover, I can no longer support the site. My Twitter account is now parked for the foreseeable future to avoid any risk of impersonation, and it is currently locked. Don't expect any interaction any time soon. Instead I can now be found on Mastodon - an open source, distributed network of social networking servers. Some of the deliberate design choices Mastodon has made seem to have made the interactions there much more valuable, and less inclined towards polarisation of views and deliberately manufactured conflict. Put simply, it simply seems to be a friendlier and more v

This article has been bubbling under for a while, triggered when I stumbled across this Twitter thread making some predictions about the near future of work. The ideas resonated with me, but this tweet in particular caught my eye: " what companies think hybrid work is and what workers think it is are two different things " I am already seeing evidence that this prediction is coming true. " Hybrid Working " is such a loaded term that misunderstandings are inevitable. Yet it is still being sold as the “best of both worlds” (office and remote) even though it is likely to become the worst of both unless companies handle things very carefully indeed. As the pandemic restrictions are eased, this will become more and more important. Before looking at how best to handle hybrid working patterns, what is it exactly? And what might the options be? "Hybrid" seems to be best defined as some people working in the office some of the time. This definition is fine, but i