Jan/10

27

Addendum to Brooks’ Law

Thinking Man

I just read Joel Spolsky’s blog entitled “A Little Less Conversation” which discusses something I’ve blogged about in the past here and here, communication overload.

After reading that post I began to consider my own personal experience in meetings over the last dozen or so years and decided to add an addendum to the communication node problem that was so eloquently detailed in the Mythical Man Month by Brooks.

The problem with Brooks’ theory of intercommunication is that it doesn’t take into account the “Number of Managers” in any given meeting.  He assumes in his calculation that all nodes in a communication network are equal.  This is a mistake.  All nodes are not equal, as anyone who has sat through a meeting with more than one manager participating can attest to.

Managers have keen insight into every major (and minor) issue at hand and willingly share that information with the team in a seemingly endless discourse that greatly adds to the meeting’s productivity and value.  In fact I’ve been in meetings with multiple managers that have lasted two, maybe three, times longer than the scheduled meeting length due to the significant wisdom that each of the managers was imparting to their counterparts and the team.

This imbalance in communication node weighting should be reflected in a revised formula for group intercommunication (especially meetings).  Brooks’ original formula can be stated as n(n-1)/2=communication pathways. The revised formula adds the significance of management communication to the pathways problem by accurately describing the impact of management on the original formula.  This new formula can be expressed as (n(n-1/2)) ^x (^x indicates raised to the power of x) where x is the number of managers.

As an example I will restate the original example given by Brooks and then show the difference when true communication weighting has been added…

Example: 50 developers give 50 · (50 – 1) / 2 = 1225 channels of communication.

However, given our new formula and assuming the presence of 3 managers (or significant stakeholders) into our team we now see the impact of the additional management on our communication overhead.

Example: 50 developers + 3 Managers give (50 · (50 – 1) / 2)^3  = 1838265625 channels of communication.

There, that’s better.  This new formula clearly shows the benefit of adding additional management resources to any project.

You can thank me later Fred ;-) .

Related Reading

RSS Feed

3 Comments for Addendum to Brooks’ Law

Recommended Links for January 27th | Alex Gamela - Digital Media & Journalism | January 27, 2010 at 1:49 pm

[...] Addendum to Brook’s Law [...]

Tom | January 27, 2010 at 4:55 pm

Great. Let’s encourage further arrogance on the part of developers who think only they know anything, and that only what they know is valuable, and don’t give a &^#$& about my business needs.

Author comment by mindby | January 27, 2010 at 10:14 pm

@Tom. I guess it did read a little like that but the intent was actually more around meeting room rhetoric than anything else. It always seems the more managers in the room (or on the phone) the deeper the “poo” gets… with one manager trying to look more brilliant than any of the others. Sorry to offend :)

<< Just Along For The Ride

Elements of Trust >>

Copyright by Brent McConnell
Log in

Tag Cloud

To top