In the talk guy explained about a Christopher Avery's Responsibility process. this model deals with how people react and behave when they encounter a problem they need to solve. The model deal with various states that describes how a person reacts:
- Denial – First reaction is to ignore the problem. it didn’t really happen.
- Blame – when we cant ignore the problem we look for someone else to blame. “it wasn’t me it was XXX”
- Justify – when we finish blaming, we then start to look for justification on why this happens. (the situation forced us to do this, things just didn’t let us do something different,…)
- Shame – after we finish to justify our actions, we understand that it something we did and then we are a shamed that we did this and that
- Obligation – here we understand that something needs to be done, however we don’t do what we want to do but something we feel we must do.
- Responsibility – this is the state we want to be. here we take ownership of the problem and use our ability to deal with it and make things better
- QUIT – sometimes, before we assume responsibility we choose to give up and just let go.

According to Christopher, this model is quite universal and there is no way skipping this stages, the trick is to recognize where you are and try as much as possible to pass through these stages as fast as possible in order to reach “Responsibility”.
What did occur to me while hearing Guy describe the model, is that this model is not only applicable to individual, but can also describe organization culture. Personally, going over some of the companies I encountered, this model can be used to better describe how the organization as a whole is behaving. The easiest one to spot of course is the Blaming culture.
We finished off the session by doing a nice exercise in which guy used a friendly competition to show how one can better spot where a person might be located in this model by listening to what people are saying. things like:
- “but our group is only 3 people so we need more time” – justification,
- “We should have done XXX” – shame.
- “But we must do YYY” – obligation
All and all a very interesting session, I cant wait for December 17th to hear Christopher Avery himself going in depth into the subject. Two hours is not long enough to really cover this subject


11/07/2012
Posted in: 
Instoolation (n): belief that process problems can be solved by installing a tool. Gojko Adzic,

on Sunday 1/7 Iltam is going to conduct an interesting meeting that will cover some very interesting agile subject. Specifically what I really like about this meeting that after a very long time I see some content that will mention my old and favorite Extreme Programming process. For some reason the XP methodology is no longer discussed in the Israeli community.
Over the last decade or so I encounter quite a few managers, while each of them was unique in its own way, I roughly found that I can divide them into two main groups according to their strategy.
Marc Löffler in
Taken from Agile Testing list:
Gil Zilberfeld asks
Over the last couple of weeks I was helping a developer tackle some nasty issues with some automated tests which kept failing for no apparent reason. The tests in question were not unit tests and did not belong to the end to end type. Instead they were somewhere on the level of component and involved several units of code, a service or two, some threading and communicating to another process.
