Suitcase Farmer

Some projects are bigger than one person.

A NomadicProgrammer can sow wild oats in many fields. But the fields may not be as large as they could be if planted by a NomadicTribe, and they may not flourish as many seasons as if planted by a PastoralProgrammer. The projects of NomadicProgrammer s, left untended, can develop serious maintenance and management problems.

The seed of a great idea often starts with one person, and is honed and refined by others to the point that the idea can become reality. Large ideas that grow this way can be taken forward by groups of people.

A common dynamic in this process it that the hearers of the idea put their own spin on it and take their own vision forward with much energy and excitement. This vision is often at odds with the the original vision.

Another dynamic is that the hearers of the idea may actually come to think that the idea was originally of their own making; this is commonly mistaken as a liability to the project. In fact, it is a liability only to the ego (and perhaps career) of the original problem-solver who seeded the idea. It's particularly hard to take for the problem solver if it is their job to come up with such ideas, as is true in Research or in consulting engagements.

And it's important to the career of the Researcher or consultant that their contribution be recognized, even though the team, in the end, may not recognize the significance of their contribution. If the Researcher or consultant is to 'play again',' it is particularly important that the project PatronRole (or the Researcher or consultant's Patron) understand the significance of their contribution.

Therefore: The Researcher or consultant can line up the initial resources (ideas, project members with suitable domain expertise) and get the team engaged with the idea. At that point, the team is self-supporting. All along the way, the Researcher or consultant needs to make sure that the project PatronRole understands the team's progression of thought.

By packing a suitcase and moving away from the team, the Researcher or consultant gives the team space to do what they do best, without interference. It's like the SuitcaseFarmer who puts beef cattle to pasture for several months while pursuing leisure or other ventures, returning after several months to share in the profit.

Lest there be any misunderstanding, these are very smart cattle, and we don't extend the metaphor to their slaughter (or, if we do, it's in the spirit of the RestaurantAtTheEndOfTheUniverse).

Of course, if there is a drought or other disaster in the Researcher or consultant's absence, there's a chance that the Researcher or consultant might have to share in those consequences.

At the first successful benchmark, the Researcher or Consultant can engage the Patron so they share in the rewards received by the team, and GetTheirTicketPunched? to play again.

The team ends up with a product they are proud of and with which they identify. The product also has a base of long-term support which isn't found in the NomadicProgrammer model.

Sometimes the Researcher or consultant can see the vision through all the way to the first release, at which time divergence creeps in. In one BellLabs project, I was brought in as a design consultant. I introduced CRC cards as a design technique; because I ended up holding some of the cards in the design, I ended up doing some implementation. But most of the implementation took its own course under the changing forces of project technologies and priorities, and the development team expertly took the project forward.

One liability of this model is that it's difficult to manage long-term success. This is particularly important in the Research context. If the Researcher comes up with an apparently brilliant idea, and the idea is embraced by development, it may lead to short-term success, or at least the illusion of short-term success. If the idea is flawed in ways that show up only in the long term, the Researcher is gone by the time the ideas surface or are acknowledged, and the Researcher can continue to sow damage elsewhere. One reason this is more sinister for Researchers than consultants is that Researchers are viewed as contributing to long-term results, whereas the expectations for consultants' results are more short-term.

This pattern is closely related to SandyFrasier?'s BreadOnTheWaters? pattern for technology transfer.

-- JimCoplien

CategoryConsulting