Many large companies, even those that author software, view enterprise software development as primarily an integration task, with components to be sourced. Whi

Many large companies, even those that author software, view enterprise software development as primarily an integration task, with components to be sourced. While you can see how they might arrive at this conclusion and buying a product is ostensibly easier than building a competing product, these shops never seem to factor in the cost of integration. Legacy systems, inter-departmental coordination, standardization on training... All of this is really expensive. And its made more expensive by the having to have a very expansive security group attempting to fit external pieces into an internal puzzle. What I think is the worst part of this is that the assumption is that software architecture and design then becomes a task that revolves around the existing and purchased tools, and very abstract pricing considerations can strongly influence these toolchains. It leads to very strange forces acting on your definition of a good technical hire. Almost none of them are beneficial for a robust and/or diverse technical organization.