Keep Learning: Bringing New Tools (and AI) Into Real Work
Chasing trends wastes hours, and pushing a tool on a team can lock bugs into its tests. Learn from a real gap, then pilot a new tool, AI included, on one feature with a baseline and rules, and let the team decide on the numbers.
Key takeaways
- Pick what to learn from a real gap in your work, not from a list of trends.
- Learn in small, regular doses and use it the same week; teaching it to the crew makes it stick.
- Introduce a tool through a pilot: one feature, a baseline, a time box, and rules agreed up front.
- Measure the costs as well as the gains; AI-written tests can copy a bug from the code into the expected values.
- Write the result and the decision down, failures included, so the team decides together instead of by enthusiasm.
Contents
FAQ
How do I convince my team to try a new tool?
Do not ask them to adopt it; ask for a small pilot on one feature for two weeks, with a baseline and an agreed measure. A short written result, good and bad, convinces more people than a demo.
Is it safe to use AI coding tools at work?
Check your company's policy first, never paste secrets or customer data into a tool it has not approved, and have a person review every line the tool writes. Treat its output as a draft.
Sources
Only you and the owner see your answer and rating. Send private feedback
Enjoyed it? Support fx-blog with a coffee.
Related posts
Build the Ship You Want to Sail On: Culture and Giving Back
If a team's good habits live only in its lead, it works only while the lead is in the room. Repeat a few habits weekly: specific thanks, a calm reply to bad news, sponsoring people for real chances, and handing on what you learned.
Manage the Team: Goals, Trust and Delivery
Eleven goals nobody remembers, and a red result found in week 12, cost a lead the team's focus and the boss's trust. Set a few measurable results with one owner each, send a five-line update weekly, and report red early with a plan.
One-to-Ones That Matter, and Handling Conflict
Skip one-to-ones and you hear about trouble when someone stops coming to standup. Hold them weekly with their agenda first; when two people clash, talk to each privately, then together, and end on a shared rule, not a winner.
Comments
Oldest firstNo comments yet. Start the conversation.
Part 3 ended with Pip's evenings back and a new itch: she wants to grow. Brock keeps mentioning an AI tool that writes test cases, and the Admiral's team is talking about it too.
Pip stares at a list of "things every developer should learn this year". Rust? Kubernetes? That AI test tool?
Kit leans over her shoulder. "What slowed you down most last month?"
Dev Voyage: Open Ocean, in six parts:
Start from what slowed you down
"Refund tests," Pip said. "Edge cases. Two days."
That answer made the list irrelevant. The AI test tool was worth a look because it might close a gap she actually had. Rust could wait.
Pip's learning habit after that was simple:
A pilot, not a campaign
The fastest way to make a team hate a tool is to push it on everyone at once. The Thoughtworks Technology Radar sorts technology into rings: assess, trial, adopt, hold. A pilot is the trial: small enough to be safe, real enough to teach you something. Pip asked Kit for two weeks and wrote one page.
What the two weeks showed
Test writing took about a day instead of two. Pip kept 26 of the 40 generated tests after review. Then, on the last Thursday, Bun shouted across the deck.
The tool had read what the code does and written tests that expect it, bug included. Without Bun's review, those three tests would have locked the bug in.
Public research is mixed in the same way. In GitHub's controlled experiment, developers using Copilot finished a set task 55% faster. DORA's research on AI describes it as an amplifier: it magnifies a team's existing practices, good and bad. Your own pilot, on your own code, is the result that counts for your team.
Pip wrote the result up the way Michael Nygard suggests for architecture decisions: context, decision, consequences.
The crew voted yes, with both rules. Nobody felt pushed, because the bad news was in the report next to the good. A pilot that ends in "no" is just as useful: the team stops arguing about the tool, with evidence.
Try it
This week:
The crew adopted the tool, and Ollie was delighted. Too delighted: she wants it on every team, and the Admiral wants to know if it's worth paying for. Now Pip has to explain review rules and rounding bugs to people who decide in money and dates. Part 5, Talk to the Business: Working With PMs and Non-Engineers, is how she translates.
Read this with your AI