<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<feed xml:lang="en-US" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <title>andthennothing.net: Promiscuous pairing</title>
  <subtitle type="html">&amp;ldquo;first there was a three-legged monkey...&amp;rdquo;</subtitle>
  <id>tag:andthennothing.net,2005:Typo</id>
  <generator uri="http://typo.leetsoft.com" version="4.0">Typo</generator>
  <link href="http://andthennothing.net/xml/atom10/article/283/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/xml+atom"/>
  <link href="http://andthennothing.net/archives/2005/10/05/promiscuous-pairing" rel="alternate" type="text/html"/>
  <updated>2005-12-18T03:19:08+00:00</updated>
  <entry>
    <author>
      <name>Jonas Bengtsson</name>
      <email>jonas.b@home.se</email>
    </author>
    <id>urn:uuid:b7e166f1-240b-4c44-b10c-245a5e2a9fa5</id>
    <published>2005-10-05T21:39:00+00:00</published>
    <updated>2005-12-18T03:19:08+00:00</updated>
    <title>Promiscuous pairing</title>
    <link href="http://andthennothing.net/archives/2005/10/05/promiscuous-pairing" rel="alternate" type="text/html"/>
    <category term="pairprogramming" scheme="http://andthennothing.net/tags/283"/>
    <category term="xp" scheme="http://andthennothing.net/tags/283"/>
    <category term="agile" scheme="http://andthennothing.net/tags/283"/>
    <category term="productivity" scheme="http://andthennothing.net/tags/283"/>
    <category term="knowledge" scheme="http://andthennothing.net/tags/283"/>
    <content type="html">&lt;p&gt;Via the &lt;a href="http://agiletoolkit.libsyn.com/index.php?post_id=15636"&gt;Agile Toolkit Podcast&lt;/a&gt; I discovered the article &lt;a href="http://www.agile2005.org/XR4.pdf"&gt;Promiscuous Pairing and Beginner’s Mind: Embrace Inexperience&lt;/a&gt; by Arlo Belshee. It&amp;#8217;s been a while since I&amp;#8217;ve read such an interesting article!&lt;/p&gt;


Arlo describes how Silver Platter have experimented with different approaches to pair programming and task ownership/distribution. And most of their findings are not what you expect, and often they contradict commonly held truths. Some of them are:
	&lt;ul&gt;
	&lt;li&gt;assigning tasks to the least qualified worked better long term than assigning to the most qualified or randomly&lt;/li&gt;
		&lt;li&gt;team ownership of the tasks (team accountability) worked better than individual ownership (individual accountability)&lt;/li&gt;
		&lt;li&gt;task grabbing (pull) worked better than assignment (push)&lt;/li&gt;
		&lt;li&gt;swapping pairs each 90 minutes was most productive&lt;/li&gt;
		&lt;li&gt;for time between swaps of one hour to a day it was more productive if the one who had been with the task the longest switches task than if one stayed with a task until its completion&lt;/li&gt;
	&lt;/ul&gt;


	&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.agile2005.org/XR4.pdf"&gt;Go read the whole article now!&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;


	&lt;p&gt;Oh, and that they use C++ makes it even more interesting!&lt;/p&gt;</content>
  </entry>
</feed>
