SPaMCAST 445 – Capers Jones, Selecting Software Metrics

http://www.spamcast.net

Listen Now
Subscribe on iTunes
Check out the podcast on Google Play Music

SPaMCAST 445 features the return of a favorite, Capers Jones.  It is always fun to talk with someone with their own page in Wikepedia.  Capers and I talked about his new book, A Guide to Selecting Software Measures and Metrics. Capers is passionate about software quality and measurement. Capers said, “High-quality software is not expensive. High-quality software is faster and cheaper to build and maintain than low-quality software, from initial development all the way through total cost of ownership.” from The Economics of Software Quality.  As usual, Capers was engaging, educational and controversial.  Spending time with Capers is always a learning experience!

Capers biography is long and storied.  Let it be said that Capers is a serial author, public speaker, pundit, guru and deep thinker.  Check out his Wikipedia page or Linkedin.

Capers can be contacted at capers.jones3@gmail.com.

Capers first appeared on SPaMCAST 3 and  last appeared on SPaMCAST 53

Re-Read Saturday News

This week we tackle Chapter 7 of Holacracy: The New Management System for a Rapidly Changing World by Brian J. Robertson published by Henry Holt and Company in 2015.  Chapter 7 shows how to generate alignment between roles, circles, and the overall organization.  Lots of inspect and adapt talk this week.

Catch up on the first four entries in the re-read

Week 1:  Logistics and Introduction

Week 2: Evolving Organization

Week 3: Distribution Authority

Week 4: Organizational Structure

Week 5: Governance

Week 6: Operations

Week 7: Facilitating Governance

Week 8: Strategy and Dynamic Control

Visit the Software Process and Measurement Cast blog to participate in this and previous re-reads.

 

A Call To Action

If you got a new idea this week while listening to the podcast, please give the SPaMCAST a short, honest review in iTunes, Stitcher or wherever you are listening.  If you leave a review please send a copy to spamcastinfo@gmail.com.  Reviews help guide people to the cast!

Next SPaMCAST

SPaMCAST 446 will feature our essay on questions.  Questions are a coach and facilitator’s secret power!   Do you have a favorite go to question you like to ask?  Care to share?

We will also have columns from Gene Hughson and Jon Quigley (and maybe more)!

Shameless Ad for my book!

Mastering Software Project Management: Best Practices, Tools and Techniques co-authored by Murali Chematuri and myself and published by J. Ross Publishing. We have received unsolicited reviews like the following: “This book will prove that software projects should not be a tedious process, for you or your team.” Support SPaMCAST by buying the book here. Available in English and Chinese.

 

 

Test Case Points Overview: An Example, Strengths and Weaknesses

Strengths and Weaknesses are up in the air!

Jeremy Berriault provided an example from this presentation at QAI Quest 2017 for us to count test case points.  Jeremy, QA Corner,  indicated baseline data was required to effectively run the three test cases in his example

The logon, transaction

, reports and expected output blocks represent verification points.  The arrows from one test case to another represent interfaces and steps are. . .steps.  The results of the count is as follows:

Test Case	Number of Steps	Interfaces	Verification Points	Baseline Test Data	Complexity
test case 1	4	0	4	required	medium
test case 2	4	0	4	required	medium
test case 3	3	2	3	required	medium

Deriving the complexity leverages the following chart:

 

Final Notes on How To Measure Anything by Douglas Hubbard

How to Measure Anything, Finding the Value of “Intangibles in Business” Third Edition

I am traveling this week in India for the 13^th CSI/IFPUG International Software Measurement & Analysis Conference: “Creating Value from Measurement”. Read more about it here. In the meantime, enjoy some classic content, and I’ll be back with new blog entries next week.

 

SPaMCAST 421 – Vanity Metrics, Unity of Purpose, Leadership

http://www.spamcast.net

Listen Now
Subscribe on iTunes
Check out the podcast on Google Play Music

The Software Process and Measurement Cast 421 features our essay on vanity metrics.  Vanity metrics make people feel good, but are less useful for making decisions about the business.  The essay discusses how to recognize vanity metrics and the risks of falling prey to their allure.

We will also have columns form Steve Tendon with another chapter in his Tame The Flow: Hyper-Productive Knowledge-Work Performance, The TameFlow Approach and Its Application to Scrum and Kanban, published by J Ross (buy a copy here). Steve and I talked about Chapter 13.  Finally, Gene Hughson will anchor the cast with an entry from his Form Follows Function Blog.  Gene and I started talking about leadership patterns and anti-patterns.

 

Are Vanity Metrics Statistically Valid?

Just because you can measure it, should you?

Over the last two weeks, we published three articles on vanity metrics:

Vanity Metrics in Software Organizations

Vanity Metrics? Maybe Not!

Vanity Metrics Have a Downside!

One of those articles elicited an interesting discussion on Twitter.   The discussion was predominately between @EtharUK (Ethar Alali) and @GregerWikstrand.  The discussion started by using the blog entry from 4 Big Myths of Profile Pictures from OKCupid to illustrate vanity metrics, and then shifted to a discussion of whether vanity metrics can be recognized based on statistical validity.  The nice thing about Twitter is that responses are forced to be succinct.  See the whole conversation here.

 

Vanity Metrics Have a Downside!

Danger!

Vanity metrics are not merely just inconvenience; they can be harmful to teams and organizations. Vanity metrics can elicit three major categories of poor behavior.

1. Distraction. You get what you measure. Vanity metrics can lead teams or organizations into putting time and effort into practices or work products that don’t improve the delivery of value.
2. Trick teams or organizations into believing they have answers when they don’t. A close cousin to distraction is the belief that the numbers are providing an insight into how to improve value delivery when what is being measured isn’t connected to the flow of value.  For example, the organization that measures the raw number of stories delivered across the department should not draw many inferences in the velocity of stories delivered on a month-to-month basis.
3. Make teams or organizations feel good without providing guidance. Another kissing cousin to distraction are metrics that don’t provide guidance.  Metrics that don’t provide guidance steal time from work that can provide real value becasue they require time to collect, analyze and discuss. On Twitter, Gregor Wikstrand recently pointed out:

@TCagley actually, injuries and sick days are very good inverse indicators of general management ability

While I agree with Greger’s statement, his assessment is premised on someone using the metric to affect how work is done.  All too often, metrics such as injuries and sick days are used to communicate with the outside world rather than to provide guidance on how work is delivered.

Vanity metrics can distract teams and organizations by sapping time and energy from delivering value. Teams and organizations should invest their energy in collecting metrics that help them make decisions. A simple test for every measure or metric is to ask: Based on the number or trend, do you know what you need to do? If the answer is ‘no’, you have the wrong metric.

 

Vanity Metrics? Maybe Not!

A beard without gray might be a reflection of vanity at this point in my life!

Unlike vanity license plates, calling a measure or metric a ‘vanity metric’ is not meant as a compliment. The real answer is never as cut and dry as when someone jumps up in the middle of a presentation and yells, “that is a vanity metric, you are suggesting we go back to the middle ages.”  Before you brand a metric with the pejorative of “vanity metric,” consider:

1. Not all vanity metrics are useless.
2. Your perception might not be same as someone else.
3. Just because you call something a vanity metric does not make it true.

I recently toured several organizations that had posted metrics. Several charts caught my eye. Three examples included:

1. Number of workdays injury-free;
2. Number of function points billed in the current quarter, and
3. A daily total of user calls.

Using our four criteria (gamability, linked to business outcomes, provides process knowledge and actionable) I could classify each of the metrics above as a vanity metric but that might just be my perception based on the part of the process I understand.