Management antipatterns

From CSSEMediaWiki
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Reverted edits by Ebybymic (Talk); changed back to last version by Matthew Harward)
 
(2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
A selection of a few existing management [[Antipatterns]]:
 +
 
*[[Continuous obsolescence]] - When technology changes so rapidly that the development can't keep up with current versions of the software. [[William Brown 1998|WB]]
 
*[[Continuous obsolescence]] - When technology changes so rapidly that the development can't keep up with current versions of the software. [[William Brown 1998|WB]]
 
*[[Design by committee]] - This antipattern results in a overtly complex system that lacks coherence. This can occur when the design team does not work together in a cohesive manner. [[William Brown 1998|WB]]
 
*[[Design by committee]] - This antipattern results in a overtly complex system that lacks coherence. This can occur when the design team does not work together in a cohesive manner. [[William Brown 1998|WB]]

Latest revision as of 03:23, 25 November 2010

A selection of a few existing management Antipatterns:

  • Continuous obsolescence - When technology changes so rapidly that the development can't keep up with current versions of the software. WB
  • Design by committee - This antipattern results in a overtly complex system that lacks coherence. This can occur when the design team does not work together in a cohesive manner. WB
  • Golden hammer - When a single technique is applied "obsessively" to software problems. WB
  • Lava flow - Dead and forgotten code that hardens and becomes unchanged as the system develops. Requires a change in development strategy. WB
  • Mushroom management - This occurs when developers are separated from the end users. WB
Personal tools