The Procrustean Bed: How Arbitrary Standards Can Undermine Software Development

Introduction

The concept of the Procrustean bed, which originated from Greek mythology, has become relevant in many fields, including software development.

According to Greek mythology, Procrustes was a criminal blacksmith and bandit who would physically harm people by forcing them to fit onto his iron bed. In one version of the myth, Procrustes had one bed; if a victim were shorter than the bed, he would stretch them until they fit; if they were too tall, he would cut off their legs.?According to Pseudo-Apollodorus's Bibliotheca, there is a darker version of the Procrustes myth in which he owned two beds of different sizes. He would force shorter victims to lie in the larger bed and taller victims in the smaller bed. This version of the myth highlights Procrustes' inflexible and arbitrary behavior, serving as a metaphor for situations where individuals or systems impose rigid standards without considering individual differences or circumstances.

In software development, the Procrustean bed can take different forms. It includes strict adherence to programming languages, architectural styles, and technologies without considering their appropriateness.

The Procrustean Bed in Software Development

In software development, the Procrustean bed often arises from cognitive biases, organizational culture, and systemic pressures. We can see the Procrustean bed concept in several ways:

Legacy systems. Many organizations try to adapt new business requirements or processes to their existing legacy systems, as they are already familiar with and established. However, these legacy systems may not be ideal for efficiently handling new requirements, resulting in inefficiencies, workarounds, and potential errors. This technique is like trying to suit a square object into a round hole, as the new requirements are forced to fit into the old system instead of adapting the system to meet the unique needs.

One-size-fits-all solutions. Software engineers or architects sometimes make the mistake of using a single key or technology for all problems, even if there are better fits. We can see when they use a relational database for all data storage needs, even when a NoSQL database would be better suited for specific use cases. This approach forces the technology to fit the problem instead of tailoring the solution to the problem. It's like using a Procrustean bed.

Over-standardization. Software development relies on standards and conventions to ensure consistency and maintainability. However, over-standardization can be detrimental. For example, enforcing a strict coding style or architectural pattern on all projects, regardless of their unique requirements or constraints, can limit creativity and result in sub-optimal solutions.

Design patterns. Although design patterns can be helpful, they may become restrictive if not used appropriately. For instance, if a software engineer applies the same design pattern in every situation, regardless of its suitability, it may result in unnecessary complications and low efficiency.

Agile frameworks. When following Agile frameworks such as Scrum or Kanban, it's essential to be flexible and consider the team's or project's unique needs and context. Rigidly adhering to practices like daily stand-ups or pair programming may only sometimes be beneficial and should be evaluated accordingly.

Programming languages. Software engineers sometimes use a single programming language for all projects, even if it's not the most suitable choice for a particular task. For instance, they may use Python for everything instead of opting for a more performance-oriented language like C++ when needed. It is a Procrustean bed, forcing the task to fit the language rather than selecting the best-suited language.

Architectural styles. Microservices is an architectural style that may seem like a perfect solution for all software architecture needs. Although it offers benefits such as scalability and decoupling, it can also introduce complexity and may only be helpful for specific projects. It would be unwise to force all projects to conform to a microservices architecture as it could lead to unnecessary difficulties.

Hardware and software products. Some companies use a specific hardware or software product for all their business needs, even if it isn't the best fit. For instance, they might use a particular brand of server hardware for all tasks, even though other brands could offer better performance or value for specific tasks. Similarly, they could use a single software suite for all their business processes, even when specialized software might be more efficient for particular tasks.

Technologies. Some people view technologies such as blockchain, AI, and machine learning as universal problem solvers. However, it's important to note that each technology has advantages and limitations. For instance, relying solely on blockchain for data storage would only be practical for some situations. It's necessary to consider the specific requirements of each task before selecting a technology solution.

In each of these instances, it is essential to consider the unique requirements and context of the problem before imposing a rigid framework or solution. Doing so can result in less-than-ideal solutions and inefficiencies. It serves as a reminder that while standards, conventions, and proven solutions are valuable, it is crucial to apply them in different ways and to recognize the strengths of specific languages, styles, products, and technologies.

Impacts on Software Architecture Principles

The Procrustean bed can significantly impact fundamental software architecture principles such as modularity, abstraction, loose coupling, high cohesion, single responsibility, and separation of concerns.?

Modularity. The Procrustean bed can undermine modularity by forcing a one-size-fits-all structure onto software components. It can lead to a monolithic design where components are not independent, making the system harder to understand, modify, and maintain.

Abstraction. Abstraction involves simplifying complex systems by breaking them down into manageable parts. The Procrustean bed can compromise this principle by forcing a complex system to conform to a simplistic model, leading to oversimplification and loss of necessary detail.

Loose coupling. The Procrustean bed can lead to tightly coupled systems. If software engineers force components to fit a preconceived structure, they may be tightly interconnected, making the system less flexible and more challenging to modify.

High cohesion. High cohesion means a component or module should have a single, well-defined purpose. The Procrustean bed can compromise this principle by forcing unrelated functionalities into a single component, leading to low cohesion and making the component harder to understand, test, and maintain.

Single responsibility. The single responsibility principle states that a class should have only one reason to change. The Procrustean bed can violate this principle if software engineers design classes to conform to a rigid structure rather than focus the design around class responsibilities. It can lead to complex classes to understand, test, and maintain.

Separation of concerns. The separation of concerns implies separating a program into distinct sections, each handling a specific task. The Procrustean bed can undermine this principle if a software engineer force tasks to fit a preconceived structure, leading to a system where concerns are not adequately separated, making it harder to understand, modify, and maintain.

In all these cases, the Procrustean bed can lead to software that is harder to understand, test, modify, and maintain and less flexible and adaptable to changing requirements. It's a reminder of the importance of tailoring software architecture to the specific needs of each project rather than trying to force a project to fit a preconceived architectural model.

Causes of the Procrustean Bed in Software Development

The causes of the Procrustean bed in software development are multifaceted, often related to human cognitive biases, organizational culture, and systemic pressures. Here are some common reasons:

Resistance to change. Humans resist change, especially when it means unlearning our usual methods or tools and adopting new ones. This resistance can result in using standard methods or tools that are not the most effective, like being stuck in a Procrustean bed.

Lack of knowledge or skills.?Sometimes, individuals may need to be made aware of more effective options or lack the necessary abilities to utilize them. Consequently, they may use familiar but less-than-ideal techniques or resources, resulting in a Procrustean bed scenario.

Cost considerations. Switching to different methods, tools, or systems can be expensive in terms of both money and time. As a result, some people may avoid change, leading to a situation similar to the Procrustean bed.

Organizational culture. Some organizations have a culture that discourages innovation and encourages conformity. Organizations may pressure people to conform to established methods or tools in such conditions, leading to a Procrustean bed situation.

Systemic pressures. External factors like regulations, industry standards, or market demand sometimes force a company to use a software system that may not best fit its specific needs. It is a Procrustean bed, where an external factor forces the company to conform to a predetermined standard.

Cognitive biases. Cognitive biases can influence our beliefs, such as confirmation bias. This bias is our tendency to favor information that aligns with our ideas. Similarly, status quo bias is the inclination to prefer things to stay the way they are present. Both of these biases can contribute to the Procrustean bed phenomenon.

Over-reliance on past success. Sometimes people tend to rely too much on what has worked in the past, even when there may be better options for the current situation. It can lead to a problem where they try to force a solution that doesn't quite fit, a Procrustean bed condition.

Addressing these causes involves a combination of education, training, organizational change, and systemic reform. It's essential to foster a continuous learning and improvement culture where people are encouraged to question the status quo and explore new methods, tools, and systems.

Mitigating the Procrustean Bed in Software Development

It's essential to be aware, educated, flexible, and open to challenging the norm to avoid the Procrustean bed in software development. Here are some effective strategies that both individuals and organizations can implement:

Promote awareness. The initial step to avoid the Procrustean bed is to acknowledge its existence. We must familiarize ourselves with the idea and identify instances where we or our organization try to fit a situation into a predetermined structure.

Encourage diversity of thought. Foster an environment where different perspectives, ideas, and approaches are valued. It can help to challenge the status quo and prevent the imposition of one-size-fits-all solutions.

Continuous learning. Encourage continuous learning and professional development. It is necessary to remain updated with the latest trends, technologies, and best practices. It can help us recognize when a better solution or approach might be available.

Flexibility. It's essential to be adaptable and open-minded in our approach. Remember that what works in one situation may not necessarily work in another. Be willing to make adjustments and change our approach as necessary.

Challenge the status quo. It is crucial don't be frightened to challenge the status quo. We must speak up if we believe there is a better way to do something. It is critical to encourage others to do the same.

Critical thinking. It's essential to think critically and not just accept things as they seem. Ask questions, dig deeper, and understand why people execute tasks a certain way.

Risk management. It's essential to recognize that change and maintaining the status quo involve risks. To address this, create a risk management plan that weighs the potential risks of making changes against the risks of not making any changes.

Leadership support. Leadership plays a crucial role in avoiding the Procrustean bed. Leaders must set the tone by promoting flexibility, encouraging innovation, and supporting continuous learning.

Organizational culture. Cultivate a corporate culture that values innovation, flexibility, and continuous improvement. It can prevent the imposition of rigid frameworks and encourage the exploration of diverse solutions.

By implementing these strategies, individuals and organizations can avoid rigid conformity and create a more favorable atmosphere for innovation, adaptability, and ongoing progress.

Conclusion

Like Procrustes in Greek mythology would force his victims to fit into his bed, software engineers may also make the mistake of forcing solutions into preconceived frameworks, resulting in less-than-optimal outcomes. It can significantly affect the basic principles of software architecture, ultimately reducing the effectiveness and efficiency of software systems.

The myth of the Procrustean bed serves as a clear warning about the risks of arbitrary standardization that fails to consider individual cases or situations. But with proper knowledge, adaptability, encouragement of innovation, and a commitment to ongoing improvement, we can avoid this pitfall and ensure that our software development practices are customized to meet the specific needs of each project.

Organizations can improve their software development processes, create better products, and thrive in the digital age by adopting adaptable and flexible approaches rather than rigid standardization. The Procrustean bed serves as a powerful metaphor, emphasizing the risks of inflexibility and the significance of adaptability when dealing with diverse challenges.