> > I got this from Peter Scholtes' "The Leader's Handbook"
> ISBN 0-07-058028-6.
>
> Thanks - that looks like a good book; I might pick it up.

Scholtes is a Deming fanatic. There's some interesting stuff in there. I'm not sure I agree with every bit of it but it's definitely worth reading. A lot of it is pretty technical which I'm not quite ready to absorb. I expect I will look at it a number of times and focus on different things. It's structured in a way that is conducive to that.

Ian-

Since I seem to have you attention, I was just thinking about how (IIRC) you were exploring the use of Scala in your development shop. If that's correct, would you consider a blog update on have that is going (or went)?

thank,

-James

> ...
>
> The worst bug I ever created ...

Now *that* is a great interview question! "What was your worst bug?"

I also often ask an interviewee to do a code review on some existing code I find out in the wild. Another favorite question is to ask what technical books have been recently read.

> > > I got this from Peter Scholtes' "The Leader's
> Handbook"
> > ISBN 0-07-058028-6.
> >
> > Thanks - that looks like a good book; I might pick it
> up.
>
> Scholtes is a Deming fanatic.

I'm quite familiar with Deming, but not Scholtes. The term "Deming fanatic" is a case of modifying absolutes; Deming was consider fanatical his entire working life. The term could also connote that Scholtes takes Deming to an extreme that Deming, himself, didn't. In what way has he done so?

> I'm quite familiar with Deming, but not Scholtes. The
> term "Deming fanatic" is a case of modifying absolutes;
> Deming was consider fanatical his entire working life.
> The term could also connote that Scholtes takes Deming to
> o an extreme that Deming, himself, didn't. In what way
> has he done so?

I'm not sure your understanding of the word 'fanatic' matches mine. My understand roughly matches:

"marked by excessive enthusiasm and often intense uncritical devotion"

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fanatic

What I meant in this context is that the reader of the book I referenced is often expected to believe certain things without any other explanation than "Deming taught us..." That kind of thing is what I expect to hear in a sermon but not in a secular context. It could just be that the exact reasoning is outside the scope of the book but 'appeal to authority' doesn't appeal much to me and leaves a bit of a bad taste in my mouth.

I don't want to make this point too strongly. I like the book overall and recommend it.

> Now *that* is a great interview question! "What was your
> worst bug?"

Apparently, at some employers, the only acceptable answer is: "I've never created any."