Resilience Coffee/2026/07/17

Topics: value of code review Activities have multiple purposes Validation Accountability Control centric view Assumption: If code review goes well, then we're good Complex system view: Information sharing Repair for coordination that doesn't happen "The human mind is an eventually consistent data store" Concilable, but very tense Especially in tension when alternatives prioritize one or the other Code review as an (lesser - async) alternative to Pair Programming XP dogma: Writing test cases is to understand the business domain Synchronous time is zero sum: Pairing eats into that Compensating factors, replace but don't fully overlap Approaches: Flip the script: Have juniors review senior's code in a way to do knowledge transfer Noisy syntax nits: shift to formatters and linters "I recently finished reading Vaughan's Challenger Launch Decision, and one of the manager she cites mentions the feeling of having to change the evidence burden from "show it will work" becoming "show it won't fail" (which she points out was a function of the review level, not a culture shift, but still feels relevant to some of these control discussions)" Westrum model of org culture (pathological, bureacratic, generative) https://psychsafety.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Westrums-Typology-Assessment.pdf https://dora.dev/capabilities/generative-organizational-culture/ Local values within the team can contrast with the organization Culture perspectives: Functionalist Descriptivist Conflicting approachs: trying to _enforce_ a generative culture can self-limit Schulman healthcare needs to learn from rather than eradicate death culture: functionalist vs. descriptivist. reliability: avoiding known issues vs. improvising for unknown issues. (as per schulman) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/297887933_General_attributes_of_safe_organisations (another factor Schulman mentioned elsewhere was "attitude towards heroes" -- do you embrace or criticize deviations, regardless of good outcomes) that makes me think of a couple Dekker books: https://sidneydekker.com/just-culture https://sidneydekker.com/stop-blaming And also this book from a "second victim" perspective https://www.upress.umn.edu/9781517914189/trauma-sponges/ Another perspective: https://beyondcommandandcontrol.com/beyond-command-and-control-book/ James K. Styner had the plane crash and created advanced trauma life support (ATLS). It sparked the conversation with Liz Fong trying to shim medical response practices (DRABC) into the technical incident response process. Should we bring our whole selves to our work? Or do we adapt to the environment we are in? Support can take multiple forms: Validation "How can I help?" Recognizing which type of conversation you're in is important, being explicit can help

  - How to think/learn/prepare for what's next: Using 

Devine Lu Linvega 100 rabbits - https://wiki.xxiivv.com/site/collapse_computing.html https://100r.co/site/permacomputing_101.html - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3u7bGgVspM wisdom to extract value

  - climate​
   - civil engineering climate resilience
    - Smalltalk
   -