Imagine you are a pianist, not a programmer

I love metaphors. The main thing is to use them correctly. The metaphor does not explain the whole phenomenon, in all its aspects and variations. Rather, it is needed in order to see a familiar situation or problem from a new angle and, possibly, rethink.



Unfortunately, or fortunately, but somehow more and more people began to come across to me who do not favor critical thinking. Increasingly, programmers, managers, salespeople, and customers are thinking in stereotypes - perhaps because many patterns, techniques and ready-made solutions have appeared in our profession. Inside of which it is increasingly written "no need to think, just execute."



Therefore, you have to come up with metaphors yourself in order to stir up the consciousness of colleagues and push them to independent thinking. You don't have a problem with critical thinking, so I offer you one metaphor. Just so you can use it. Of course, if it seems to you worthy of application.



A metaphor about automation and its impact on business.



What is automation? It's just a way of materializing change. One of many. Accordingly, the impact on business is determined to a greater extent by the essence of the change, and not by its materialization.



But poor-quality materialization, alas, also reduces the impact of the change to nothing, as does a poor-quality, ill-considered, change out of context. Automators, however, got out and learned to do materialization ... nothing. There is no change, but there is automation.



And the authors of the changes, seeing the hand-made materialization, slowly grow dull and propose more and more meaningless changes - all the same, they will be done so crookedly that the lack of a result can always be attributed to execution.



So a metaphor.

Change is a melody.

Automation is a grand piano.

Business spectator.

Benefit, result - the mood of the viewer.



For the viewer to be satisfied, at least two factors are important - melody and performance. You can, of course, play the piano without a melody, although this activity is strange, empty and meaningless. But in life it often happens - it's called automation for the sake of automation.



On the other hand, the grand piano is just “one of”, not the only instrument for playing a melody. There are such wonderful pieces that blow away the roof even when performed with a voice, a cappella. There are also dudes in the world who can play on coconuts, cans or their own skull.



The grand piano, as an instrument, is of little value to the viewer. For a pianist-programmer - yes, because you can sit and clatter purely for fun, at least scales, or select melodies by ear. However, the viewer cannot be impressed.



It turns out that in this metaphorical model, the melody is more important. Although, there is nothing surprising in that - the melody is more important and interesting for us than the ensemble, orchestra or person performing it. Even now, in the heyday of home-made covers, we, of course, are subscribed to a specific person with an electric guitar, but we are waiting for the performance of familiar melodies. When he plays something of his own, the rating drops sharply.



However, there is a classic and trust in it with complete ignorance. Probably, there are connoisseurs who go to classical concerts just to listen to Rimsky-Korsakov's “Bright Celebration”, but most go to the orchestra or conductor. And what they will play there is not very important, the audience trusts the choice of the famous masters.



What are the automation classics? If absolutely on top, then 1C and the site (on Bitrix, of course). Thanks to the developed (or most developed) partner network of 1C orchestras to choose from, you will download. True, they play so-so, but the spoiled mood of the viewer can always be attributed to a bad melody. Who knew that classics can be boring and useless?



If someone is indignant and says that 1C and Bitrix are not classics, but pop, I will not argue. As stated in the first paragraphs, a metaphor is not a complete model. Although, perhaps, I went too deep into attempts to pull it on to reality, like an owl on a globe. Back to the point.



The bottom line is that automation is about implementing business-critical change. If automation did not affect the business in any way, then there were no changes, and the automation was done in vain. Only the guys practiced banging on the keys - be it a keyboard or a piano.



The absence of business-positive changes as a result of automation is a common, classic situation. It is usually justified by a bad implementation - like the idea was a good one, but they did it as best they could. The pianist is bad.



However, if a pianist comes across a good one, a real, deep problem emerges. The man at the piano turns to the audience and asks - what should you play, dear ones? Well, then you know.



Klavdia Ivanovna, chief accountant, asks to get Serduchka down - to install 1C: Accounting, which is "available and serious." It’s fun for her, the rest are furious or silently endure, convinced of the opinion that “automation is something about accounting”.



Veniamin Gerhardovich, commercial director, asks, of course, something from Artur Pirozhkov - to make a website on Bitrix. Nobody really minds, tk. the video sequence is cool. True, it gets boring quickly. And sales are still not growing.



And the director, of course, asks you to screw up Tsoi or Vysotsky - a seemingly simple system of 3-5 digits that show the state of affairs in the company. But this music is not only for the enjoyment of the ear. She calls on life to change. If this is not done, then the melodies either cease to be perceived, or become unbearable. As well as 3-5 digits that tell you to fire all the old fart managers, but you don't want to do this.



I think the point is clear. When the implementation of changes, i.e. execution of their physical materialization, at a height, it turns out that the viewer simply does not know what he wants. Or he cannot find a repertoire that will benefit everyone, or at least the majority of the audience.



There is, of course, a way out that the metaphor suggests - let the performer determine the repertoire. In business, it often happens when programmers come up with tasks for themselves. True, the auditorium is empty.



So, friends, automatics, let's move on. We will play for ourselves and our friends - the same programmers who will understand. Let's play at 4x speed, either ass or blind.



And when the audience comes - we will play them Serduchka, Pirozhkov and Tsoi. To not be kicked out of work.