Great example of how programmers love to over-complicate everything.
Dave Giunta
19 May 06
Okay, so let me get this straight, on the left is a spinning circle of root cause analysis, and on the right is a lighter spinning circle of root cause analysis. Other than the words on top of the spinning circles of nothingness, err… I mean root cause analysis, what on earth is the difference?
My favorite part of the whole thing is the last paragraph on the linked page. Can anyone show me where the patented Black Box technology comes into play on the chart above?
Nice.
Jesse
19 May 06
Reminds me of the GEARtek project by artist Kevin Bewersdorf.
Traditional root cause analysis involves gathering information about the problem, recreating the circumstances in which the problem occurred, and analyzing the outcome. Lather, rinse, repeat.
If you automate the gathering of information about what’s happening in the organization, eliminate the need to recreate scenarios, and accelerate the analysis process, you save a lot of time and energy.
Not sure about one thing - is the “automated and accelerated” process still iterative? or have you basically broken the chain of iterations by acheiving sufficiently high self-awareness within the organization using automatic information-gathering?
Rahul
19 May 06
If you look at the chart without any glasses on (or just cross your eyes), it looks like a really simplistic drawing of a Hummer.
First, this is an image that is a link to a system that promises to speed things up. I believe that Matt’s point was to point out that diagrams need to communicate well, and this one doesn’t.
Secondly, would also guess this ties into keepin it real, and keeping it simple. Or really simple for short.
looks like a simplified model of system and problem analysis. Hell, at the enterprise level its 95% discovering the probable and then actual root causes - then 5% implementation. If you look at project/ quality management methodologies like Six Sigma or ASAP - this model simplifies it in the truest of form.
A more “everyday level” approach to this model is: taking a thorough and comprehensive look at the causes of a problem help define a better solution. I guess we all, my self included, some time jump to a conclusion with out fully understanding why things actually happen.
1. Getting Real is making software that works in the first place. Write a test before you write code.
2. This system promises to DECREASE communication.
3. It’s only for Java and .Net, apparently, other platforms have no need for their product.
Santiago Gomez
19 May 06
If I had six hours to chop down a tree, I�d spend the first four sharpening the axe. � A. Lincoln
Dave
19 May 06
> Great example of how programmers love
> to over-complicate everything.
It’s designers who over-complicate everything :) We programmers are looking for the cleanest, simplest, most efficient solutions. Then the designer steps in and forces custom fonts, rounded corners, gradients, arrows, flash, sound… an all-encompassing “user experience”
The salses team isn’t helping out us programmer either. It’s harder to sell a one page site for $5k than it is a 100 page site for $5k.
As a programmer, I guarentee that “Problem Resolution Process” is the horrid brain child of a sales person and a design.
meigh
19 May 06
“We programmers are looking for the cleanest, simplest, most efficient solutions.”
No you fucking aren’t. That’s why there are millions of Java morons. If programmers historically cared about simplicity, they would have used Smalltalk instead of C++.
Wyatt
19 May 06
Can someone explain to me why the readers of this blog are always guessing as to what some obscure post means?
Decide for yourself if there’s a thread.
- ML
Why does anyone even guess as to what it means? The people who write the posts don’t even know what it means. They are most likely just sitting back and laughing at the people who try to make sense out of the stupid shit they post.
That diagram is horrible, communicates very little and so far no one seems to *really understand* it. On top of all that the (linked) page of text is completely unreadable and covered in business-speak, by which I mean it contains the word ‘leverages’; which in my experiance is always a bad sign ;)
Anytime I see a claim of huge savings or benefits my B.S. shields automatically come up and red lights start flashing…take us outta here Scotty!
Dave
21 May 06
> That�s why there are millions of Java morons
So because Java and C++ exist, all programmers try and overcomplicate?
Using your logic, I’ll claim that all designers suck because Comic Sans, Papyrus and the lens flare filter exist.
You’ve never even used Smalltalk. You just read Pragmatic Programmers and thought it sounded cool, right? Last year, you were the wannabe who wouldn’t shut up about Ruby, but now that everyone uses Rails, you need something more “underground”, right?
Nanito
22 May 06
>Tim 19 May 06
>Would somebody mind explaining this graph to me? I really >don�t get it.
Yes, well first all every time you see something like 80%-20% think about a kinf of interpretation of the Pareto principle.
Tom Greenhaw
22 May 06
OMG, yet another piece of quality software from the folks at BMC…
I especially love how they eliminate recreating a failure, this saves time by eliminating the necessity of testing the correction! If the correction doesn’t work, the system automates the process of cycling again.
Take a careful look at the diagram above, those are spinning wheels! They may even qualify for a patent on perpetual motion!
27 comments so far (Jump to latest)
Adam 19 May 06
Wait wait wait, this is Automated AND Accelerated?
HELL YES.
Tim 19 May 06
Would somebody mind explaining this graph to me? I really don’t get it.
Joe 19 May 06
This system should work every time! Thanks!
adam 19 May 06
That diagram was all I needed to finish my time machine.
Thanks!
Brendan 19 May 06
Up to 70% reduction in time, cost & effort clearly equates to the use of dashed lines & gradient fades with a slight reduction in size.
bryan 19 May 06
This may well be what is needed to solve America’s healthcare crisis. Treat root causes, not over prescribe medications to treat the symptoms.
Chris Griffin 19 May 06
Great example of how programmers love to over-complicate everything.
Dave Giunta 19 May 06
Okay, so let me get this straight, on the left is a spinning circle of root cause analysis, and on the right is a lighter spinning circle of root cause analysis. Other than the words on top of the spinning circles of nothingness, err… I mean root cause analysis, what on earth is the difference?
My favorite part of the whole thing is the last paragraph on the linked page. Can anyone show me where the patented Black Box technology comes into play on the chart above?
Nice.
Jesse 19 May 06
Reminds me of the GEARtek project by artist Kevin Bewersdorf.
michal Migurski 19 May 06
Translation: “measure twice, cut once.”
sodium11 19 May 06
Here’s my best guess at what this means:
Traditional root cause analysis involves gathering information about the problem, recreating the circumstances in which the problem occurred, and analyzing the outcome. Lather, rinse, repeat.
If you automate the gathering of information about what’s happening in the organization, eliminate the need to recreate scenarios, and accelerate the analysis process, you save a lot of time and energy.
Not sure about one thing - is the “automated and accelerated” process still iterative? or have you basically broken the chain of iterations by acheiving sufficiently high self-awareness within the organization using automatic information-gathering?
Rahul 19 May 06
If you look at the chart without any glasses on (or just cross your eyes), it looks like a really simplistic drawing of a Hummer.
Jared White 19 May 06
So instead of figuring out what the problem is, we can just recycle our computers?
The big yellow arrow in the middle is hypnotizing me into a believer….
Randy Peterman 19 May 06
First, this is an image that is a link to a system that promises to speed things up. I believe that Matt’s point was to point out that diagrams need to communicate well, and this one doesn’t.
Secondly, would also guess this ties into keepin it real, and keeping it simple. Or really simple for short.
Jimmy 19 May 06
looks like a simplified model of system and problem analysis. Hell, at the enterprise level its 95% discovering the probable and then actual root causes - then 5% implementation. If you look at project/ quality management methodologies like Six Sigma or ASAP - this model simplifies it in the truest of form.
A more “everyday level” approach to this model is: taking a thorough and comprehensive look at the causes of a problem help define a better solution. I guess we all, my self included, some time jump to a conclusion with out fully understanding why things actually happen.
Marko 19 May 06
1. Getting Real is making software that works in the first place. Write a test before you write code.
2. This system promises to DECREASE communication.
3. It’s only for Java and .Net, apparently, other platforms have no need for their product.
Santiago Gomez 19 May 06
If I had six hours to chop down a tree, I�d spend the first four sharpening the axe. � A. Lincoln
Dave 19 May 06
> Great example of how programmers love
> to over-complicate everything.
It’s designers who over-complicate everything :) We programmers are looking for the cleanest, simplest, most efficient solutions. Then the designer steps in and forces custom fonts, rounded corners, gradients, arrows, flash, sound… an all-encompassing “user experience”
The salses team isn’t helping out us programmer either. It’s harder to sell a one page site for $5k than it is a 100 page site for $5k.
As a programmer, I guarentee that “Problem Resolution Process” is the horrid brain child of a sales person and a design.
meigh 19 May 06
“We programmers are looking for the cleanest, simplest, most efficient solutions.”
No you fucking aren’t. That’s why there are millions of Java morons. If programmers historically cared about simplicity, they would have used Smalltalk instead of C++.
Wyatt 19 May 06
Can someone explain to me why the readers of this blog are always guessing as to what some obscure post means?
Why does anyone even guess as to what it means? The people who write the posts don’t even know what it means. They are most likely just sitting back and laughing at the people who try to make sense out of the stupid shit they post.
Suthers 20 May 06
I think they’re laughing at us in Chicago.
That diagram is horrible, communicates very little and so far no one seems to *really understand* it. On top of all that the (linked) page of text is completely unreadable and covered in business-speak, by which I mean it contains the word ‘leverages’; which in my experiance is always a bad sign ;)
E. Moore 21 May 06
Anytime I see a claim of huge savings or benefits my B.S. shields automatically come up and red lights start flashing…take us outta here Scotty!
Dave 21 May 06
> That�s why there are millions of Java morons
So because Java and C++ exist, all programmers try and overcomplicate?
Using your logic, I’ll claim that all designers suck because Comic Sans, Papyrus and the lens flare filter exist.
You’ve never even used Smalltalk. You just read Pragmatic Programmers and thought it sounded cool, right? Last year, you were the wannabe who wouldn’t shut up about Ruby, but now that everyone uses Rails, you need something more “underground”, right?
Nanito 22 May 06
>Tim 19 May 06
>Would somebody mind explaining this graph to me? I really >don�t get it.
Yes, well first all every time you see something like 80%-20% think about a kinf of interpretation of the Pareto principle.
Tom Greenhaw 22 May 06
OMG, yet another piece of quality software from the folks at BMC…
I especially love how they eliminate recreating a failure, this saves time by eliminating the necessity of testing the correction! If the correction doesn’t work, the system automates the process of cycling again.
Take a careful look at the diagram above, those are spinning wheels! They may even qualify for a patent on perpetual motion!
Mike 22 May 06
Talk about problem resolution, I absoultely love this picture: http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2006/05/21/business/21AIRTRAVEL_CA0ready.html. Neither one is budging!