I think this might be one reason why pair programming can be difficult at times. I’ve personally found success in pair programming, but it usually came after adopting an attitude of moving past the stuff we know and trying a more free, humble approach.
This isn’t the best way to put it, but for lack of better words just starting with the mentality of admitting that it’s ok not to know what to do next and that we’re here to solve it really helps fight the kind of bias the article talks about.
It’s when you get to the point that you’re comfortable just reasoning aloud that the beauty of pair programming comes to light. Silly mistakes happen constantly but they’re caught right away and you move on so quickly in your shared state of excitement that a lot of the inhibition just goes out the window.
Mileage varies though, as not everyone gets the same benefits that I described.
Yeah, I think of this as the locker room effect. If you're not used to it, undressing in a locker room can feel scary. You're naked! But once you get used to it, you realize everybody is naked and it's fine.
But that's conditional on everybody not being jerks. Anybody who tries to score points by pointing out weaknesses is toxic to open and honest collaboration.
Scary I think is one thing, and I certainly think some people feel exactly this. Other folks I think struggle with maintaining this very direct but neutral voice that works well in pair programming. One that reflects curiosity, scrupulousness, and empathy all in one voice. Others I think struggle with the idea that it's more difficult to control the image people see when they're so rawly exposed to people.
Yeah my problem is more similar to this. I get impatient pretty often, and I worry that I seem impatient, and that it makes the person I'm pairing with anxious about me rushing them, and then whether they're actually anxious about that or not, I'm still anxious about trying not to be impatient or at least not seem like I am.
This is a totally personal problem, and I've had pretty long successful periods of my career that I've pair programmed most hours of most days, and I do think it's a technique with a lot of advantages, but it really isn't my favorite thing to do because of this kind of dynamic.
yea, pointing out weakness cannot be discouraged or you create a race to the bottom in the name of being nice. the "scoring points" thing is subjective to the group and is mostly equivalent to "don't be a jerk".
My best experiences with pair programming have been with people that I trust a great deal, enough to know that we'll definitely still be cool after arguing code. I don't think it'd be of any use at all unless we were both comfortable enough with each other to be intellectually honest, and able to both criticize our opinions and agree with them when appropriate.
Some people are afraid of conflict and would rather agree when they really don't, some other people are just looking to "win" or always poke holes at everything but their own takes, both types aren't very useful in the end.
In my experience, when you find that sweet spot with someone who complements you, pairing up is just the best, definitely more than the sum of our parts.
This isn’t the best way to put it, but for lack of better words just starting with the mentality of admitting that it’s ok not to know what to do next and that we’re here to solve it really helps fight the kind of bias the article talks about.
It’s when you get to the point that you’re comfortable just reasoning aloud that the beauty of pair programming comes to light. Silly mistakes happen constantly but they’re caught right away and you move on so quickly in your shared state of excitement that a lot of the inhibition just goes out the window.
Mileage varies though, as not everyone gets the same benefits that I described.