3 ms·

> It sounds like the highest levels of management have written what is being run, and yet not want to seem to maintain it, or directly lead the engineering org.

> It sounds like the highest levels of management have written what is being run, and yet not want to seem to maintain it, or directly lead the engineering org. Well, in their defense: they have to, you know... run the company. Engineering was supposed to maintain the current software, but they (engineering) chose to deprecate it and make a new version from scratch. It is just taking way longer than expected, three years and just a fraction of the original functionality. > If an employee finds a much better way of doing things, the founders should be happy, but they may be sending mixed signals. Problem is: they're not doing anything better. Customers prefer the old software. Other employees prefer the old software. Even some people on the team prefer the old software.

matfil 8y ago
Engineering was supposed to maintain the current software, but they (engineering) chose to deprecate it and make a new version from scratch. It is just taking way longer than expected, three years and just a fraction of the original functionality. This seems like a key issue. It's time to evaluate progress on the re-write and work out what to do next, with all options on the table (including re-focussing on the old software, or even starting afresh with a "version 3"). Are there any people in the engineering group who have been doing non-trivial bits of work on the old software? It may be worth cultivating these people and taking their opinions seriously, even if it ends up putting other (perhaps more senior) noses out of joint within the engineering group.
- thrwwyngnr 8y ago
  One of the guys who left engineering takes care of the old software, plus some other new stuff. He's indeed friendlier than engineering. Might be a good idea indeed to integrate him with his old team, or maybe build a new team around him.
  - matfil 8y ago
    Make sure you understand why this person left engineering. "Integrating him with his old team" could be good, but could also be throwing him right back into the middle of something he was actively trying to get away from.
cbanek 8y ago
Right, I get that they have to lead the company. But if other parts of the company are doing well, and engineering is struggling, and they have key insights into how the software was built, and why it was better, it would seem they would be in the perfect spot to lead the engineering team to a better place. They are the subject matter experts, and it seems like this app, whatever it is, is key to your business. And they previously made it successful. But you said they don't want to touch it with a 10-ft pole. This just doesn't add up.
- thrwwyngnr 8y ago
  They tried once, but that was a year ago. You're have a good point. Maybe after one year things will be different.

matfil 8y ago

Engineering was supposed to maintain the current software, but they (engineering) chose to deprecate it and make a new version from scratch. It is just taking way longer than expected, three years and just a fraction of the original functionality. This seems like a key issue. It's time to evaluate progress on the re-write and work out what to do next, with all options on the table (including re-focussing on the old software, or even starting afresh with a "version 3"). Are there any people in the engineering group who have been doing non-trivial bits of work on the old software? It may be worth cultivating these people and taking their opinions seriously, even if it ends up putting other (perhaps more senior) noses out of joint within the engineering group.

thrwwyngnr 8y ago
One of the guys who left engineering takes care of the old software, plus some other new stuff. He's indeed friendlier than engineering. Might be a good idea indeed to integrate him with his old team, or maybe build a new team around him.
- matfil 8y ago
  Make sure you understand why this person left engineering. "Integrating him with his old team" could be good, but could also be throwing him right back into the middle of something he was actively trying to get away from.

cbanek 8y ago

Right, I get that they have to lead the company. But if other parts of the company are doing well, and engineering is struggling, and they have key insights into how the software was built, and why it was better, it would seem they would be in the perfect spot to lead the engineering team to a better place. They are the subject matter experts, and it seems like this app, whatever it is, is key to your business. And they previously made it successful. But you said they don't want to touch it with a 10-ft pole. This just doesn't add up.

thrwwyngnr 8y ago
They tried once, but that was a year ago. You're have a good point. Maybe after one year things will be different.