4 ms·

> But it actually doesn't work with software engineers as well as it could. Part of the reason is that relatively small details have organization-wide impacts.

> But it actually doesn't work with software engineers as well as it could. Part of the reason is that relatively small details have organization-wide impacts. A handful of services might be under-resourced and overdue to drop calls to legacy APIs... That causes ongoing effort to maintain those APIs, the outdated technology they depend on, ad infinitum. Entire migrations can grind to a halt. Engineer productivity could be cut in half. Gaping security holes can be unfixed. Top-down solutions to those problems ("Here's budget. Fix it!") don't necessarily help as solving the systemic problems can require technical analysis to fully map from strategic needs to particular patches to particular projects. The people that understand systemic technology impact and the people who understand systemic cost and value need healthy and active lines of communication. Passing status messages up, down, and across the chain of command only gets you so far.

mason55 5y ago
It's the idea that money/technology can fix a people/process problem. I see it all the time. It takes many forms: If we could just find the right magic tool then all our problems would be solved! Step 1 is build automation, step 2 is define the process! What we need to fix this broken process is more people. These two teams have different goals/OKRs so they have trouble getting along, let's fix it with technology Technology and money are great accelerators but if you don't have a process that could be performed manually with enough people then technology is just going to make you do the wrong thing faster.
nine_zeros 5y ago
There's this weird notion among directors, VPs and svps that any problem can be fixed with staffing. It just needs more staffing, no biggie. They just can't grasp that it could be done by motivation of existing engineers, lesser micromanagement and more inspiration. When you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

mason55 5y ago

It's the idea that money/technology can fix a people/process problem. I see it all the time. It takes many forms: If we could just find the right magic tool then all our problems would be solved! Step 1 is build automation, step 2 is define the process! What we need to fix this broken process is more people. These two teams have different goals/OKRs so they have trouble getting along, let's fix it with technology Technology and money are great accelerators but if you don't have a process that could be performed manually with enough people then technology is just going to make you do the wrong thing faster.

nine_zeros 5y ago

There's this weird notion among directors, VPs and svps that any problem can be fixed with staffing. It just needs more staffing, no biggie. They just can't grasp that it could be done by motivation of existing engineers, lesser micromanagement and more inspiration. When you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail.