Comments on: Are You a Rule Maker or a Rule Breaker?

By: Richard

Richard — Mon, 14 May 2007 19:29:28 +0000

I think that the number one reason to have rules matches the reason to have compiler warnings turned on and a policy that all code must be warning free (but to allow @SurpressWarning annotations with significant comments). Rules may be broken, but breaking a rule should require a moderate amount of “work” - commenting, explanation, etc. This discourages random lawlessness and makes sure that the rules are generally followed. If there’s a very minor reason to break the rule, with this policy it will probably be followed anyway. If there’s a good reason to break it, the added explanation (in code for compiler warnings, in a meeting or a document for business warnings) will be a very small price to pay.

By: Michael

Michael — Sun, 03 Dec 2006 06:44:46 +0000

It is interesting to look at your diagram classifying rule personality types. As I read your article I cant help but wonder if a reverse scale on to whom the rules should apply most to applies. Where the chaotic cowboy should have the rules be forced on them all the time since they are the ones who likely need to follow them most. Conversely the rule makers could then be above the rules since they are likely to make the best choices, in relation to the rules anyways. Pragmatists like you and me can then apply the rules when they make sense.

By: Basil Vandegriend

Basil Vandegriend — Wed, 29 Nov 2006 14:32:32 +0000

John, I agree that in reality people are more complex - someone may be a chaotic in one situation and bureaucratic in another, and the categorization itself will depend on your viewpoint, like you point out.

Based on your first paragraph, I suspect you are a pragmatic. A few of my experiences suggest that bureaucrats can so strongly believe in the necessity of rules that they will enforce them even when the costs exceed the benefits, at least according to the judgement of pragmatics like myself :). According to them, however, the violation of a rule is such a bad thing that it is automatically better to follow the rule, no matter the cost.

By: John

John — Tue, 28 Nov 2006 20:18:52 +0000

I think some of the people you are calling Bureaucratic would be unhappy with your implication, in the last paragraph, that they support rules whose cost outweighs their benefit. I’m pretty sure even the most rule-oriented person believes that all those rules are helpful or even necessary.

The threshold is probably more one of how the costs and benefits of a given rule are perceived, and that leads me to believe that a person’s classification in this chart is only accurate in a given area. To programmers, managers might seem to be bureaucrats, but the programmers don’t directly get to see all the benefits of their rules or the costs of breaking them.

By: Dan Pritchett

Dan Pritchett — Sun, 26 Nov 2006 17:23:54 +0000

Excellent classification of rule personalities. I too tend to be a pragmatic and find the bureaucratic group the most difficult to manage. Rules are created to serve an organization. Once the rules fail to do that, it’s time to revise or replace them. Simple enough concept but very difficult to implement.

By: jk

jk — Sat, 25 Nov 2006 09:27:19 +0000

I like to make rules, but fail to follow them. Freud has something to say about that. I think of it as the Programmer’s Complex.