Linky #2 - From Systems Thinking to Reliability: What Drives Quality?
A handpicked selection of articles, talks, and ideas shaping quality engineering.
Welcome to the second edition of Linky (see Linky #1 for the first edition), where I’ll highlight articles, essays, or books I’ve recently enjoyed, with some commentary on why they caught my attention and why I think they’re worth yours.
Latest post from the Quality Engineering Newsletter
As with any new idea, misconceptions and myths emerge as people try to figure out how to apply it to their context and extract the value from adopting it. While this is not an exhaustive list, I see some pitfalls around Quality Engineering that we should watch so that QE doesn't become another fad.
From the archives
This is my third post on QEN, which explains what being a quality engineer involves and discusses systems thinking, socio-technical systems, complexity theory, and how quality is an emergent behaviour of complex systems. I believe this post helps develop our understanding of the value that quality engineers bring and counters many misconceptions people have about quality engineering.
Talk by Dr. Russ Ackoff on Quality Improvements of Systems (1994)
Test Pappy has been documenting his journey with systems thinking (well worth a read), and in it, he shared this fantastic video from Dr. Russ Ackoff.
It’s only 12 minutes long but packed with systems thinking gold. Ackoff explains why continuous improvement initiatives often fail—mainly because they don’t take a systems view. Key takeaways relevant to quality engineering:
You need to improve the whole system, not just its individual parts.
Solving deficiencies in a system doesn’t improve it; it just removes problems.
Quality improvements should focus on effectiveness (the value it brings), not just efficiency (process improvements).
Productivity vs. Impact | Jessitron
I’d never considered the important/urgent quadrant this way before, but it’s a great insight:
The important but not urgent quadrant is where you do your most thoughtful and creative work.
The important and urgent quadrant pushes your brain into high alert, often shutting down creativity.
I hadn’t realised my quality engineering newsletter work sits in the important but not urgent space. That’s when I’m able to reflect, spot patterns, and write about things I take for granted. I often feel that a lot of the quality engineering work we do should sit in the important but not urgent quadrant to help us find the best solutions to the problems our teams are facing.
Via Emily Webber’s Awesome Folks Newsletter (also worth a follow!). Read here
Ideaverse Lite
I’m a big fan of Obsidian for note-taking (all my QEN posts and general ideation happen in it). This starter kit is a great way to figure out how to use it and start building your own knowledge base. Check it out
Forest & Desert | Software Design: Tidy First? | By Kent Beck and Beth Andres-Beck
"If executives don’t care about user trust, consistent design won’t be useful. If bugs don’t impact the bottom line, there’s no reason to avoid them."
I missed this post in November but caught it in Anne-Marie Charrett’s Quality Coach Newsletter #35.
This post reinforced why understanding stakeholder values is critical when defining quality. If there’s a mismatch, no amount of built-in quality will satisfy them. And the forest/desert analogy is a brilliant way to describe healthy vs. extreme working environments. Read here
FS Blog on Reliability
"Being brilliant won't save you if no one can count on you."
Reliability isn’t just a virtue—it’s a competitive advantage that compounds over time. If there’s one quality attribute you want in complex software systems, it’s reliability. When you can depend on something, it gives you certainty, which is invaluable when you understand how uncertainty affects the brain. Read here
Gradually, Then Suddenly | Doublethink | By Lewis O’Brien
"Results are a lagging indicator of consistency."
This applies so well to building cultures of quality. It can feel like you’re putting in huge amounts of effort with little immediate output. But change happens gradually—until it suddenly does. Looking for leading indicators (small environmental shifts) is key to staying motivated. Read here
Introducing the DX Core 4 | Engineering Enablement | By Abi Noda
"By providing an authoritative framework (DX Core 4) that combines DORA, SPACE, and DevEx, we hope more leaders will engage in conversations with a clear, confident understanding of how engineering is performing and what needs improvement."
DX Core 4 could be an interesting way to assess engineering environments. Essentially, are you working in a desert that’s getting drier, or are you heading towards a forest (see Kent Beck’s post above)? Read here
Nokia’s Internal iPhone Assessment (2010)
"Evaluate the partnership with Microsoft (the enemy of your enemy...)."
They saw Apple as a threat and considered the right strategic moves. But in my opinion, S60 (Nokia's flagship OS) was doomed—it was never built for touch, and hacking it to work was never going to be a winning strategy. Apple was simply too far ahead. Read here
False Secrets | The Weasel Speaks | By Alan Page
Fantastic post on transparency in leadership. Alan Page explores why, what, how, and how not to be transparent.
I spend a lot of time talking to leaders at various levels, and understanding how to be transparent is tricky. Many fear it makes them look weak, or they assume they need to share everything. This post dispels those myths.
As quality engineers, helping people lead well is a big part of building quality into systems. Read here
Systems Thinking Playlist from Complexity Lab
A 13-video playlist introducing key systems thinking concepts. Well worth watching if you’re new to systems thinking or just want a refresher. Watch here
10 Signs Your Software Project is Heading for Failure | Continuous Delivery | By Dave Farley
Another great video from Dave Farley’s Continuous Delivery YouTube channel. He outlines 10 patterns that lead to quality degradation in software systems—and what to do about them.
This is a great resource to help teams think about quality engineering without explicitly labelling it as such, which can be useful for those reluctant to adopt QE practices. Watch here
That concludes the second Linky. What do you think? Is this format appealing to you? Would you prefer more content like this or something different? Please share your feedback in the comments or reply to this email.