Chapter 3: From Philosophy toCulture

Overview

Philosophy provides roots, determines some values, and affects the design of some tools, but the fullness of the object thinking difference must be understood in terms of a broader context ”as a culture. The cultural perspective suggests the need to look for the shared, socially learned knowledge (norms, values, worldviews) and patterns of behavior (individual actions and organizational relationships) that characterize a group of people. The philosophical positions discussed in the preceding chapter are part of the cultural knowledge shared by object thinkers as members of an object culture.

Robert Glass used the metaphor of culture to explain differences in how different groups of people conceive of and develop software and how the results of their work are evaluated. His contrast of Roman and Greek cultures directly parallels the contrast made in the preceding chapter between formalist and hermeneutic philosophies. The Greek culture described by Glass is a  close match to the XP culture ^[1] and the object culture we will explore in this  chapter.

Greek and Roman

Robert Glass makes the argument for two cultures within the realm of software development, two cultures that frequently find themselves in conflict based on cultural values. He uses an analogy with Greek and Roman culture to illustrate the differences as follows :

In ancient Greece, an individual would act as his own agent in his own behalf , or combine with other people to act together as a team. In a Greek work environment, you bring your tools to work with you, you do your stuff, and then you pack up your tools and take them home. You are an individual ”an independent contractor. You are not owned body and mind. You are merely providing a service for compensation.

In Rome, one s first duty was to the group, clan, class, or faction upon which one depended for status. Known as gravitas, this meant sacrificing oneself for the good of the organization, and giving up one s individuality and identifying closely with the group. In a Roman environment you go to work, the company hands you your tools, and then it holds you and your mind hostage until you sever your relationship with the organization. You are not an individual: you are owned by the organization body and mind, twenty-four hours a day. There are substantial rewards for this, however. The organization provides you with security, money, and power.

Glass is particularly interested in the degree to which the two cultures support creativity and asserts that the Roman culture is likely to take the creativity, passion, and magic out of the work of software development. He further notes that Roman culture will emphasize up-front planning, control, formal procedures as a means of control, and maximum documentation and will value logical, analytical thinking above empirical and inductive thinking.

Even a cursory evaluation of XP values and practices reveals their incompatibility with Roman thinking. When objects were first introduced, they too reflected a Greek and not a Roman culture. Smalltalk was motivated by a need to empower people, to make interaction with a computer fun and creative. Exploratory development, a kind of rapid prototyping, was seen as the proper way to develop new software ”as opposed to the notion of up-front, detailed design and rote implementation favored by the (Roman) structured development culture.

 

Our exploration of the object culture begins with a rough enumeration of some groups likely to be included in this culture. The original proponents of  object ideas (the original SIMULA team, the Smalltalk team), advocates of behavior-based object methods , and the first XP and agile practitioners are likely candidates, and of course, any who recognize themselves as members of the Greek culture described by Glass.

Absent a full ethnography, a cursory look at the object culture reveals some important traits and characteristics. Specifically:

• A commitment to disciplined informality rather than defined formality

• Advocacy of a local rather than global focus

• Production of minimum rather than maximum levels of design and process documentation

• Collaborative rather than imperial management style

• Commitment to design based on coordination and cooperation rather than control

• Practitioners of rapid prototyping instead of structured development

• Valuing the creative over the systematic

• Driven by internal capabilities instead of conforming to external procedures

Cultures will usually have an origin myth, various heroes and heroines, and stories about great deeds and important artifacts, as well as a set of core beliefs and values. All of these are evident in the object culture and someday will be captured in a definitive ethnography. It is not my intent to elaborate that culture here, merely to draw the reader s attention to the fact that such a culture exists.

Being aware of object culture is valuable for object thinkers in four ways. First, it provides insight into the dynamics of interaction (or lack of it) between objectivists and traditionalists. Often the only way to understand the mutual miscommunications and the emotional antipathy of the two groups comes from understanding the underlying cultural conflict.

Second, and most important, it reminds the aspiring object thinker that he  or she is engaged in a process of enculturation, a much more involved endeavor than learning a few new ideas and adopting a couple of alternative practices. Most of the material in the remainder of this book cannot be fully understood without relating it to object culture in all its aspects.

Third, it suggests a way to know you have mastered object thinking. When all of your actions, in familiar and in novel circumstances, reflect the right thing without the intervention of conscious thought, you are an object thinker.

Fourth, it reminds the object thinker that culture is not an individual thing; it is rooted in community. To change a culture, you must change individuals and the way that individuals interact and make commitments to one another. Culture is shared.

Subsequent chapters will deal with object thinking specifics, all of which are intimately related to a set of first principles , or presuppositions reflective of the object culture as a whole. The four principles introduced here are frequently stated, stated in a manner that implies that the value of the principle is obvious. Just as a member of any culture makes assertions that are indeed obvious ”to any  other member of that culture.

^[1] West, David. Enculturating Extreme Programmers, Proceedings XP Universe. Chapel Hill, N.C.,  2001.