5 ms·

Why not? I mean we don't use micro-services for what it is supposed to do. The application would perfectly be a monolith. We do it, just because it lets us expe

Why not? I mean we don't use micro-services for what it is supposed to do. The application would perfectly be a monolith. We do it, just because it lets us experiment newer technologies in not-so-important services in a smaller scale without undergoing major re-work since when the change is big, everyone in management layer understandably becomes conservative.

microwhat 8y ago
Sounds like resume-driven-development. I worked at a company with this disease before. The system was an abomination of vastly different technologies over the years stitched together loosely. Development was slowed substantially by having such a mess and the company couldn't move fast enough to compete so the startup died. Usually tech isn't the reason for a startup's death. In this case, it was.
- majidazimi 8y ago
  > Sounds like resume-driven-development. Sure. That's one of the responsibilities of a team lead: to help team members to work and gradually build up their CVs. I want my team to experiment new stuff and learn while working. But I also want to limit the risk boundary. The whole reason why younger people are leaving dinosaur companies is that no one in management layer lets juniors experiment and fail. End of the day junior devs also want to improve and develop.
  - asknthrow 8y ago
    Nah, your job is to lead the team in the most effective direction in order to fulfil business objectives, not build resumes.
    - barranger 8y ago
      In that case you are going to find that you quickly lose your best devs. I'm not saying that resume building should be even within the top 5 priorities, but you will want to at least keep it in the back of your mind. It's a balancing act. Otherwise the solution is to crunch-time people into oblivion and and quickly replace them when they burn out. Not exactly sustainable
    - claydavisss 8y ago
      NOPE. First and foremost, you work for yourself. Employers come and go. If you are sacrificing your resume to meet your employer's "business objectives", you could end up with a dead worthless skillset. A balance has to be achieved. Obviously we can't sit around all day rewriting simple things in our pet language of the week...but employers need to understand that a good developer will not let their resume atrophy. The days of the twenty-five year stint followed by a gold watch and a pension are over...you simply cannot put your employer's needs ahead of your own anymore.
    - ex-aws-now-goog 8y ago
      Your job is whatever you agreed to when accepting that job. Some companies require managers to aid in the technical development of employees, some don't. Some provide a lot of latitude in how that's done, some don't.
      - eropple 8y ago
        > Some companies require managers to aid in the technical development of employees, some don't. It's not about what a company "requires". It's about the moral duty you take on when you manage people.
        ex-aws-now-goog 8y ago
        I'm not sure why you think that striving only to achieve business objectives could be considered to be a moral duty. Are you perhaps perhaps thinking of fiduciary duty? If a company decides that technical development of engineers is good for retaining engineers and you as a manager refuse to do that, then no moral argument is going to help you when you get dinged in your performance review. edit: Upon rereading the thread, I suspect that we may agree more than we disagree. My comment was directed at asknthrow's comment and I wanted to make the point (which other posters have more eloquently made in the meantime) that if technical development is part of your job as manager, you don't have a choice in the matter and your job is not just "to lead the team in the most effective direction in order to fulfil business objectives" (to quote asknthrow).
        eropple 8y ago
        For sure. To be clear, I mean that regardless of what your bosses say you have an obligation to the people you manage. Obligations do not only run upward. (This is something bad managers often do not understand.)
    - maxxxxx 8y ago
      " Nah, your job is to lead the team in the most effective direction in order to fulfil business objectives, not build resumes. " And when some new tech comes up then the business hires shiny new people because the people working for them haven't "kept up".
    - jcadam 8y ago
      As a lead you have to care about retention as well. People leave jobs when they feel like they are professionally stagnating (or worse, they stay), because for a software career, stagnation is death and everyone knows it. And high turnover will wreck your ability to deliver. So, you have to strike a balance between getting stuff done and taking care of your people in terms of professional development and growth. It's ok, most organizations fail at it. The "90% of everything is crap" rule applies to managers as well.
  - cheschire 8y ago
    I'm pretty sure the reason "younger people" leave "dinosaur companies" is because they aren't happy. What causes that unhappiness is a wide spectrum. It could be poor team leads who let the young person's peers waste time while they carry the weight. It could be compensation at large companies is based on past performance rather than future potential growth. It could be because it sounds more impressive to a young person to say they worked at X new hotness tech company, etc. Your job as team lead, however, is pretty clear. You lead a team to create value for your organization. Professional development is an obvious tool in that toolbox. Finding ways to limit or restrict exploratory development in order to reduce risk is another.
- claydavisss 8y ago
  > Sounds like resume-driven-development. aka managing your own career. Don't wait for a company to do that for you, its not 1955 anymore.

microwhat 8y ago

Sounds like resume-driven-development. I worked at a company with this disease before. The system was an abomination of vastly different technologies over the years stitched together loosely. Development was slowed substantially by having such a mess and the company couldn't move fast enough to compete so the startup died. Usually tech isn't the reason for a startup's death. In this case, it was.

majidazimi 8y ago
> Sounds like resume-driven-development. Sure. That's one of the responsibilities of a team lead: to help team members to work and gradually build up their CVs. I want my team to experiment new stuff and learn while working. But I also want to limit the risk boundary. The whole reason why younger people are leaving dinosaur companies is that no one in management layer lets juniors experiment and fail. End of the day junior devs also want to improve and develop.
- asknthrow 8y ago
  Nah, your job is to lead the team in the most effective direction in order to fulfil business objectives, not build resumes.
  - barranger 8y ago
    In that case you are going to find that you quickly lose your best devs. I'm not saying that resume building should be even within the top 5 priorities, but you will want to at least keep it in the back of your mind. It's a balancing act. Otherwise the solution is to crunch-time people into oblivion and and quickly replace them when they burn out. Not exactly sustainable
  - claydavisss 8y ago
    NOPE. First and foremost, you work for yourself. Employers come and go. If you are sacrificing your resume to meet your employer's "business objectives", you could end up with a dead worthless skillset. A balance has to be achieved. Obviously we can't sit around all day rewriting simple things in our pet language of the week...but employers need to understand that a good developer will not let their resume atrophy. The days of the twenty-five year stint followed by a gold watch and a pension are over...you simply cannot put your employer's needs ahead of your own anymore.
  - ex-aws-now-goog 8y ago
    Your job is whatever you agreed to when accepting that job. Some companies require managers to aid in the technical development of employees, some don't. Some provide a lot of latitude in how that's done, some don't.
    - eropple 8y ago
      > Some companies require managers to aid in the technical development of employees, some don't. It's not about what a company "requires". It's about the moral duty you take on when you manage people.
      - ex-aws-now-goog 8y ago
        I'm not sure why you think that striving only to achieve business objectives could be considered to be a moral duty. Are you perhaps perhaps thinking of fiduciary duty? If a company decides that technical development of engineers is good for retaining engineers and you as a manager refuse to do that, then no moral argument is going to help you when you get dinged in your performance review. edit: Upon rereading the thread, I suspect that we may agree more than we disagree. My comment was directed at asknthrow's comment and I wanted to make the point (which other posters have more eloquently made in the meantime) that if technical development is part of your job as manager, you don't have a choice in the matter and your job is not just "to lead the team in the most effective direction in order to fulfil business objectives" (to quote asknthrow).
        eropple 8y ago
        For sure. To be clear, I mean that regardless of what your bosses say you have an obligation to the people you manage. Obligations do not only run upward. (This is something bad managers often do not understand.)
  - maxxxxx 8y ago
    " Nah, your job is to lead the team in the most effective direction in order to fulfil business objectives, not build resumes. " And when some new tech comes up then the business hires shiny new people because the people working for them haven't "kept up".
  - jcadam 8y ago
    As a lead you have to care about retention as well. People leave jobs when they feel like they are professionally stagnating (or worse, they stay), because for a software career, stagnation is death and everyone knows it. And high turnover will wreck your ability to deliver. So, you have to strike a balance between getting stuff done and taking care of your people in terms of professional development and growth. It's ok, most organizations fail at it. The "90% of everything is crap" rule applies to managers as well.
- cheschire 8y ago
  I'm pretty sure the reason "younger people" leave "dinosaur companies" is because they aren't happy. What causes that unhappiness is a wide spectrum. It could be poor team leads who let the young person's peers waste time while they carry the weight. It could be compensation at large companies is based on past performance rather than future potential growth. It could be because it sounds more impressive to a young person to say they worked at X new hotness tech company, etc. Your job as team lead, however, is pretty clear. You lead a team to create value for your organization. Professional development is an obvious tool in that toolbox. Finding ways to limit or restrict exploratory development in order to reduce risk is another.
claydavisss 8y ago
> Sounds like resume-driven-development. aka managing your own career. Don't wait for a company to do that for you, its not 1955 anymore.