> We, for some reason pride ourselves on doing something new every time around, it seems. You can't copy and paste a successful surgery from one patient to ano

> We, for some reason pride ourselves on doing something new every time around, it seems. You can't copy and paste a successful surgery from one patient to another. > I've argued before with my leadership that, if we really wanted something done better/faster, we shouldn't be promoting the folks that did it out of the position for the next go around. I'm confused by this - why are you (re)building the same thing multiple times? Why are you not building on what was done before, regardless of who did it? It seems to me that either the people choosing to start over are making the choice irresponsibly, or the previous work that got someone promoted actually wasn't that great (not extensible/reusable/documented/etc). In both cases, I'd be asking management some tough questions about what they've done and/or allowed to happen.