Eight Horsers Paradox

What force produce 8 horses pulling as a single team? - such a question in some kids book on basics of physics astonished me greatly.

Author explained, that in situations when multiple horses are joined to pull some heavy load together, their total pulling force doesn't increase properly (linearly) with the number. He produced some table, supposedly calculated as a result of some real trials, looking like this:

  • 2 horses produce total force of 1.9 times compared to single horse
  • 3 produce only 2.6 times
  • 4 give just 3.1 (so one horse is almost "waste")
  • 5 yield 3.5 (one and half horses lost!)
  • 6, 7 and 8 horses barely increase this value (3.7, 3.8, 3.8 correspondingly)

This is explained by horses not pulling synchronously enough and even hindering each other efforts.

And this works in IT projects too! Let's have a look at some negative as well as some positive examples.

Seven men plus some experts

The project with codename "MP" was at very "conception" state when I joined the team. They all were very nice, positive fellows and posed themselves as "Startup". Despite such early stage, I was already 7-th in the core team, and there were more part-time specialists besides this core.

Pretty little army! But half a year later I started to feel that we only achieved as much as a pair smart students can do in a month. Half a year more - and the startup still had failed to "start".

There were several factors leading to such a sad situation, the team size (and professional level) - one of the critical ones. Read more…

Hard win with 150 heads

Very different, but also nearly-disastrous experience from the "MO" project. It evolved like this:

  • client had great but extremely puzzling task
  • and wanted quick result (in half a year)
  • then 150 people were allocated to it in hope to do it quickly

It was not complete disaster, since there was some work done anyway, but feel free to Read more in the dedicated article.

Positive Cases

Microsoft was started by just two fellows, Bill Gates and Paul Allen. Of course their first project was somewhat smaller, but it is worth studying. They learnt that MITS is producing curious and comparatively small computer "Altair 8800", lacking user-friendly software. Gates contacted MITS claiming they already work on implementation of BASIC interpreter for this machine. Thus he made sure product can potentially be sold before it was actually started.

However it is important that while Gates had obvious business skills, he actively participated in development. Guys cleverly split the work - Paul created emulator of the Altair (they have no real machine) while Gates worked on interpreter itself (supposedly acquiring and adapting some different version).

The thing was completed in a few weeks. MITS agreed to distribute it. Revenues after year and half totalled to $16000 (multiply perhaps by 10 for inflation). Picture of Microsoft staff in two more years shows 11 persons.

Similarly Apple Inc was started by two friends, Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak who conceived idea of small home computer, "Apple I". It is in many ways different, particularly because member roles were quit distinct - Steve W. was hardware guru, while Steve J. besides excellent business and management skills was always influential in shaping out requirements for company products.

Conclusion

One of "Parkinson's Laws" states that "boss on every level tends to increase the number of subordinates" - so most probably this situation goes beyond the IT-world.

The good idea is to start with 2-3 people able to produce some Proof-of-Concept solution. If you feel that team is already larger but Minimum-Value-Product is yet in unforeseeable future - most probably things already have diverted from the right way - take urgent actions immediately!