Anti-pattern

An anti-pattern in software engineering, project management, and business processes is a common response to a recurring problem that is usually ineffective and risks being highly counterproductive. The term, coined in 1995 by computer programmer Andrew Koenig, was inspired by the book Design Patterns (which highlights a number of design patterns in software development that its authors considered to be highly reliable and effective) and first published in his article in the Journal of Object-Oriented Programming. A further paper in 1996 presented by Michael Ackroyd at the Object World West Conference also documented anti-patterns. It was, however, the 1998 book AntiPatterns that both popularized the idea and extended its scope beyond the field of software design to include software architecture and project management. Other authors have extended it further since to encompass environmental/organizational/cultural anti-patterns. According to the authors of Design Patterns, there are two key elements to an anti-pattern that distinguish it from a bad habit, bad practice, or bad idea: The anti-pattern is a commonly-used process, structure or pattern of action that, despite initially appearing to be an appropriate and effective response to a problem, has more bad consequences than good ones. Another solution exists to the problem the anti-pattern is attempting to address. This solution is documented, repeatable, and proven to be effective where the anti-pattern is not. A guide to what is commonly used is a "rule-of-three" similar to that for patterns: to be an anti-pattern it must have been witnessed occurring at least three times. Documenting anti-patterns can be an effective way to analyze a problem space and to capture expert knowledge. While some anti-pattern descriptions merely document the adverse consequences of the pattern, good anti-pattern documentation also provides an alternative, or a means to ameliorate the anti-pattern.