Education vs Justification

Aaron, Janson and I were at Applebees a month ago discussing an estimate for a client. We started talking about a particular part of the estimate that would require us to take more time than usual. We worked on their project previously, and used a few testing practices that we've stopped since. I wanted the estimate to include the refactoring of the code, but not publicize the fact. Aaron wanted to communicate with the client our exact intent.

Now keep in mind, I have no qualms about transparency with clients. And I don't go to great lengths to keep clients in the dark, as some of my previous work environments have. My point was that refactoring the code and the tests was a necessary step of development. I didn't want to publicize those specific intentions because I didn't want to come across that they were optional. In other words, I didn't want our client to think that the one of our values, quality software in this case, was negotiable.

Now, I know I may be coming across rather harshly. And I may appear as the developer with blinders, who tells everyone "Just trust me, you won't get screwed." This was exactly how I portrayed my perspective to Aaron and Janson, who more or less disagreed with me for those exact reasons. We debated for a bit longer, while eating our lunch, and I finally had the Eureka moment.

Our job is a technical one. Not only does it involve many hours of learning, but it takes the obsessive-like passion to stay current. It is rather rare for clients to possess the technical knowledge, or the experience involved in constructing quality software. However they know their domain intimately, and for a developer to play the "trust me" card in a bit arrogant. As a developer, I often forget that.

Help educate them

I was feeling as if I had to justify our development practices to the client. It made me upset that I needed to have them approve my reasoning in deciding to refactor older code. Yet as I was getting worked up, it dawned on me, the client hadn't even seen the estimate. I was already prepping counter arguments, as well as previous experiences to sell my decisions which required more work.

Listening to Aaron and Janson, I realized the client didn't need justification. They weren't bringing my decisions into the light in order to criticize my knowledge as a developer. They merely wanted to match the impact of my decisions with what they knew. They sought to understand the reasoning behind my decisions.

As I've thought more about that conversation I've come to an important resolution in my career. I should never justify myself to a client, however I should always try to educate our clients. I should spend the effort to tell them the impact of taking alternate routes. I should find better ways to articulate myself and speak their language rather than swamp them with intimidating geek-speak.

Justification isn't evil

While my client's aren't developers, I am, and so is the rest of my team. This brought up the second big question and resolution "How do I know my decision is right?", which led me to: Always justify my decisions to myself, and to my team. I believe a key ingredient in improving ourselves is constant introspection. If I make a decision, and I can't debate myself or a team member on the end result, then it's probably heavily influenced by preference, or even fear.

I should always justify to myself why we test, and the rigorousness of our tests. I should always justify why we should use agile approaches to planning. I should evaluate the reasoning behind using git over svn and whether programming in ruby makes more sense than developing in java.

I've found that it's very easy to surround yourself with a community who evangelizes tools or practices, while not sincerely asking the honest questions. I've also seen a similar pitfalls in ignoring new technologies and trends, because a lack of self-justification.