3 ms·

So there are two stages here... First is caring about the what, and getting no traction in determining that. It's left to the PMs. Second is caring about the ho

by Jach 9y ago

So there are two stages here... First is caring about the what, and getting no traction in determining that. It's left to the PMs. Second is caring about the how, trying to at least get ideas implemented on that front. But what's the stage after that? If you get no traction on making a better what, nor doing it with a better how? Will a company with a strong why, a sense of purpose, that is felt and understood by all the employees help ward off the troubles of obsessing over what and how?

Terr_ 9y ago
> But what's the stage after that? Unfortunately I feel like I can answer this (or at least suggest a direction) from current personal experience. When the engineers are not allowed to fix fundamental problems, the next stage is about defending themselves from blame that they feel is not rightfully theirs. Ex: _________ "Hi Bob, this problem appears to be due to corrupt data. Our 9-year old platform does not actually use foreign-keys or database transactions, and we haven't been able to get approval to replace it." "Alex, I haven't seen this feature before, it seems to be from the offshore contractors and their PM. Reproducing the error, it seems they introduced it about five months ago, so we'll have to check those records for mistakes." "Mary, I'm afraid our software isn't able to support names in those languages. I'm including a link to a memo I made three years ago that explains the limitations and suggests some ways we could fix it, if the business considers it a priority."
- humanrebar 9y ago
  To be fair, not being able to attribute problems to their underlying cause is a fundamental problem. People strive for simple systems at least partly to seek property in their system.