Out with my friend Dave to see the Dane Cook show at the Key Arena. Looking forward to a good show.

Here is a crappy photo from my phone. The good pictures will be posted on flickr later.

In my work life I travel a lot. The hectic schedule and the many locations in which I find myself on any given Sunday mean that my connection to a single church is transient at best. I attend many different services but usually miss out that deeper connection that comes from socializing with others in a church outside of Sunday morning.

For just as we have many members in one body and all the members do not have the same function, so we, who are many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another.
-- Romans 12:4,5

This passage is easy to over-simplify. It is so easy to just skip right past, "Yes, we are a team.", "We are all in this together.", and so forth. But what about another way of looking at it for deeper meaning?

The organic connection of the elements of the body that Paul describes is a great place to start. If I twist my ankle my hands immediately reach towards my legs. If I burn my hand, my eyes see red. When a foul ball comes shooting at my head, my neck and torso contract to duck out of the way. Each part of my body is connected to every other part. The pain one feels is shared by all. The peace of relaxation or sleep is felt across my whole body. The parts all belong to the whole, but they individually belong to each other too. If your feet are cold, put a hat on.

This interconnectedness is easy to see among people who live and socialize together regularly. When you see someone almost daily, it is hard not be affected by their pain or uplifted by their joys. This I feel is one of the primary reasons a church should be about more than just worship. The worship is important, but so is maintaining the connection outside of worship.

How are we to build and grow these connections without the regular contact that comes from sharing the same geography? How are we to exercise and hone our spiritual gifts without the constant exchanges with other believers? I don't know that you can.

If the growth and development of the church is a spiritual war, then some of us are the scouts. We travel from place to place, learning and observing. We pop back into camp from time to time to share and be comforted, to encourage and bring news. Then back on the road we go, into the fray. We can do that knowing that there is a safe camp for us to retreat to when we need it. That there is an army of believers who are training each other, growing each other, and maintaining the home base for when we need it.

Back in the day at Microsoft we used to look for and train developers who were 1 pass coders. In today's world everyone is a 3 pass coder and they are starting to drag me down with them.

Let me explain the difference between a 1 pass and a 3 pass coder.

When you are writing code there are several layers (or aspects) of design and implementation activity that have to be balanced. Firstly, you have the very simple, but often disputed, question of whether the code will meet a functional objective. This is often referred to Working. If the code won't perform the purpose the code is intended for it Doesn't Work and the rest of its qualities aren't relevant. Assuming that it can be made to fulfill its intended purpose (i.e. it Works), then the other two aspects suddenly become important.

The next most tangible aspect of coding is the speed at which the code will execute or process units of work, transactions, operations, etc. Regardless of the velocity or metrics implied, the measure of this aspect of coding is generally called Performance. Making something Work is the first step which is immediately followed by does it Work Fast.

Lastly you have a host of intangibles of varying degrees of importance. There can be many tangible expressions of these intangible attributes used by different people at different times. The number of comments, the readability of the control flow, the robustness of the error and state management, and the lack of logic or bounding bugs; are all examples and all of which are related. We put these closely-coupled items in a big bucket called Quality. This may also referred to as Maintainability, Elegance, etc. If you can make it Work, and make it Work Fast, can you make it Work Correctly?

Now when someone starts out coding, they generally are capable of keeping only one layer in their mind at a time. They start by making the code Work. They just want to see it do what they think it should do. Of course, once it does that, then they immediately concern themselves with making it Work Fast. It is about this time that consumers of their code start exercising the possibilities and uncovering flaws and boundaries of the code. So a review of code usually focused on specific bugs or concerns is undertaken until eventually it is determined the code must Work Correctly. This lifecycle usually involves 3 distinct reviews or Passes on the code. It is written, then reviewed for performance or capacity, then again for bugs and boundaries.

On the other hand, a 1 Pass coder will have such a clear picture in mind of the code, the control of flow, the logic loops, the impediments and enhancements to speed, the boundary conditions and bug potentials, that the exercise is compressed into a single Pass of coding. All the work is done upfront in the design and in the construction of each line so that intangibles are caught during the initial pass.

At least that's how we used to do it. It's how I used to do it.

Now engineers are so woefully under-skilled. They aren't forced to learn logic or bit math. They didn't take any classes on algorithm design or perform exercises on bug potentials. They just want to see it Work and then have testers tell them what else needs fixing. If you want it to Work Fast they just buy bigger boxes or more of them. The days of discipline are gone.

When I have to oversee their work or explain an implementation I find myself being forced to speak in terms of what it takes to make it Work because the other layers trip them up. If I show them tight, elegant code with robust error and state management and efficient control of flow, they can't read or follow it. When I assign bugs they want to debug and watch the code execute because they can't find the bugs by reading the code. I have to worry about losing my own skills just working alongside them.

Yesterday for a personal coding project I came across a bug running the program and my first thought was to set a breakpoint and see what happened. I wanted to slap myself out of the chair! I'm better than that. I can READ and understand code. Which doesn't mean I don't take advantage of the debugger, but it shouldn't be my first thought. I'm a 1 Pass coder and I intend to stay that way.

The best part of coming home is seeing the nieces and nephews. Ain't they cool?

One of my friends was recently married. I had the honor and pleasure of watching him go from single and swinging to affianced and adoring, to married and mushy. It was awesome and beautiful and inspiring and…you get the picture.

Someone very close to me is has recently moved slowly past the dating into the engagement and is methodically preparing for the marriage thing. Again, there are fewer more precious things to watch than someone in love doing "in love" kinds of things.

Now I find out another person close to me is jumping into the same circus. No shower before the pool, clothes and all, just one quick look and then Splash! She's moving quick but seems no less sure than either of the other two. The only difference is the relationship velocity. Sort of…

You see, the other big difference between these three is their ages. The more mature they each were, the slower, the more precise, the more aware they were of surroundings, repercussions and implications.

The first one was older and the whole thing took longer; it was way more deliberate. Each step from she's cool, to she's the one, to I'm doing this, to we're really doing this, to it's done, was a shift. You could see the attitudinal change, the wheels turning, the conscious choices being made, and the glow of satisfaction that comes from the deliberate pursuit of love. It honestly humbled me.

The middle one wasn't so old, but not so young. The whole thing moves along a bit at a time, passion leading to thinking, thinking leading to passion. From phase to phase, more and more thought and effort is applied. It becomes more and more real, and you can see the personal investments increasing to that point where you can't separate the two lives anymore.

The youngster has no idea what's in store. It's all roses and blushing. Everything is a problem we'll figure out later because love conquers all and we love each other. Which is not to say it won't, they won't, or they don't. It's just at the speed they are moving their it's hard to see how they each individual operate. Which is tied to their youth. Neither has enough history and personal experience to know who they are individually, which makes it really hard to understand what they'll be like together. Of course, maybe who they are together is all that matters.

What I find so interesting about this particular reflection isn't the difference that age brings to our relationship velocity. It is the difference that maturity makes in our individual personas. When you marry, you aren't marrying the person you think they ARE, you are marrying the person you think they WILL BECOME. When you have so little insight into the person they really are currently, how well can you really understand the person they will evolve into later? Because they will evolve. And so will you.

The pressure of time, our culture and both your choices will act on you both. Like it or not, you will grow. You will change. And unlike the stock market, with people, most of the time past performance is a measure of future performance. If you are going to invest, get as much of that diverse past performance as you can so you can invest wisely.

Caleb and I got to hang out together watching Emma play in her Volleyball championship.

In my dialog with other professionals about project performance I identified two distinct roles that seemed to emerge reliably throughout every engagement. The Manager and the Driver. The Manager usually interacts with the Client or between teams and sets direction. The Driver is usually just a higher-form of Grunt Boy who is brought in to deliver on the goals and direction established by the Manager. If your software project were a pirate ship, the Manager is the Captain and the Driver is his First Mate who whips the crew to shreds, yelling at them to "Row Harder!" and so forth.

One of my most common delivery roles is being the Bad Guy. The Driver, not the Manager. It makes me almost universally despised and loathed. Of course, since the Driver is a role that someone must play on any aggressive project, when I am willing to step up, it makes me a critical necessity without which little to nothing would get done.

In my experience the difference between the Driver and the Manager rests on a couple small factors that are easily observed. Having been in both camps at various times, I can tell you that there are pros and cons of each, and each is absolutely essential at various times and in different situations. The hard part is we often don't know we need one until we really need one. We also are typically annoyed the greatest by their respective behaviors when the role is being performed most efficiently.

• Drivers realize that the maximum allowable time lag for a dialog is measured in seconds. Managers maximize communication lag to allow for spin and messaging.
• Drivers demand transparency and enforce individual accountability. Managers package information for audience appropriateness, and assign credit or blame.
• Managers review. Drivers do. I can't think of any more poignant or direct way to express this one.
• Managers buffer personalities and styles. Drivers crash people into each other.
• Managers plan and negotiate; schedules, costs, resources, environment, politics. Drivers push forward and either stop at or run over obstacles.
• Managers put the work of others into context and therefore create Value. Drivers are less concerned with showing Value; the tend to be motivated more by Accomplishments (regardless of Value).

Next time you are struggling with someone in leadership around you, run through the list and figure out what role they are playing. When you see someone playing Manager, give them credit for tackling the squishy, important stuff. When you see someone playing Driver, put on a helmet before approaching.

If you want to be liked, be a Manager. Don't sign up to a Driver unless you've got skin thick enough to handle it.

The last two weeks have been absolutely crazy. Work has been completely out of control, but I did get some zany fun in Las Vegas over the weekend. Pictures will follow as I recover…

Turn it up I never wanna go home
I only wanna be part of your breakdown
she got caught by the four on the floor
it picked her up
and she'll never get let down

and now I can't stop
thinking about it
all you people at the top
don't know nothing about it

we don't give a flip what the price is
so just leave us to our own devices
and we'll leave you alone

I'll be there when your heart stops beating
I'll be there when your last breath's taken away
in the dark when there's no one listening
in the times when we both get carried away
when we both get carried away

-- When Your Heart Stops Beating by +44

As I prepare to enter a weekend that will hopefully involve rest, I can't help but recognize how stressed I have been. My mind is usually moving pretty quick, but it has been absolutely flying the last week or so. It will take a concerted, conscious effort to set aside the concerns that still I carry and simply . . . be.

Props to my colleagues for the incredible delivery they've been pulling off. Hugely underappreciated, they're velocity is inspiring.

Pain can be the road we take that leads us to the opportunity for extraordinary ministry.

When I was younger the phrase "Whatever doesn't kill you, makes you stronger." was made popular in movies and popular culture. I still hear it from time to time. Most of the time it just seems like a catch-phrase we use to encourage ourselves or others to persevere in some hard endeavor. As is often the case, my reaction was to question and I wondered why stronger is a goal we might aspire to attain. Back to the Book.

Consider it pure joy, my brothers, whenever you face trials of many kinds, because you know that the testing of your faith develops perseverance.
-- James 1:2-3

Okay, this is pretty close. Perseverance, we know from other Scriptures, is a good step on the road to servanthood. So I suppose a loose interpretation of stronger is that we are able to persevere. That isn't what struck me in about the way James put it though.

Why on earth should we be considering the trials ( a.k.a. the pain) to be any kind of joy, let alone pure joy? Because as we struggle, as we work and endure, our eyes are not on the trial, but on the end goal. The person we are being shaped into becoming.

Leave it to me, to lose all your confidence
And no i can't stop, this train wreck before it hits
I hope I don't sound, like the X's on your calendar
I stumble on new ground, to gather up the formula

Fate, faith
You and me
Love and pain
Fate, faith
You and me
Love and pain
Even I know, there's a line between emotion and
Fate, faith
You and me
Love and pain

How selfish of me, to think I'm the only one
To question mistakes, a fools game I'm losing now
Just taking my time, planning out my escape
I'm scared what I'll find but it's the choice I have to make

We can't control what we are
It's not our place, it's out of our hands

-- Love and Pain by New Found Glory

If your motivation is correct, then work (read: pain) will make you stronger. It will shape you and build you up. It will equip you so that your service will suffice. Conversely, if your motivation is only for your own betterment, you will see only surface gain. The suffering will truly be a trial. It will become something you must persevere through instead of something that brings you joy.

I'll take the pain because of my love. I'll face the fate because of my faith and the hurt to honor Him. Servanthood is never simple.

Everywhere you look you can find ideas and checklists that help you bring transformation to your company or your life. For organizational transformation specifically, none has stood the test of time like W. Edward Demings, 14 Points.

1. Create constancy of purpose.
2. Adopt the new philosophy.
3. Cease dependence on mass inspection to achieve quality.
4. Minimize total cost, not initial price of supplies.
5. Improve constantly the system of production and service.
6. Institute training on the job.
7. Institute leadership.
8. Drive out fear.
9. Break down barriers between departments.
10. Eliminate slogans, exhortations, and numerical targets.
11. Eliminate work standards (quotas) and management by objective.
12. Remove barriers that rob workers, engineers, and managers of their right to pride of workmanship.
13. Institute a vigorous program of education and self-improvement.
14. Put everyone in the company to work to accomplish the transformation.

-- Excerpt from Chapter 2 of Out of the Crisis by W. Edwards Deming
As someone who is all too often attempting to drive transformation in various organizations, I have found my internal dialog referring to this list often enough.

As helpful as these words have been for understanding how to implement transformation in an organization, I have found his words on how to bring the individual into the process even more empowering.

The first step is transformation of the individual. This transformation is discontinuous. It comes from understanding of the system of profound knowledge. The individual, transformed, will perceive new meaning to his life, to events, to numbers, to interactions between people.

Once the individual understands the system of profound knowledge, he will apply its principles in every kind of relationship with other people. He will have a basis for judgment of his own decisions and for transformation of the organizations that he belongs to. The individual, once transformed, will:

• Set an example
• Be a good listener, but will not compromise
• Continually teach other people
• Help people to pull away from their current practice and beliefs and move into the new philosophy without a feeling of guilt about the past

-- Excerpt from Chapter 4 of The New Economics for Industry, Government, Education by W. Edwards Deming

For myself, I am often challenged on my desire to keep quality high and to not compromise on language or vocabulary during discussion. I will adapt my language and alter my point of view, but always seek for consistency and correctness in speech. Often times the less deliberate find this strict discipline confining or frustrating. For me it is the cost of quality and effectiveness.

Thanks for validating me, Deming.