3 ms·

Customers care about the outcome, not the internal process. Besides, I’ve never worked at any sizable company in my 20+-year-long career where I didn’t conclude

Customers care about the outcome, not the internal process. Besides, I’ve never worked at any sizable company in my 20+-year-long career where I didn’t conclude, “it’s a miracle this garbage works at all.” Enjoy the sausage, but if you have a weak stomach, don’t watch how it’s made. (I work for AWS but not on the DynamoDB team and I have no first-hand knowledge of the above claim. Opinions are my own and not those of my employer.)

salil999 5y ago
Exactly this. I was too young at the time to grasp this idea.
chrisfosterelli 5y ago
> Customers care about the outcome, not the internal process. This is true though there's only so much technical debt and internal process chaos you can create before it affects the outcome. It's a leading indicator, so by the time customers are feeling that pain you've got a lot of work in front of you before you can turn it around, if at all, and customers are not going to be happy for that duration. Technical debt is not something to completely defeat or completely ignore, instead it's a tradeoff to manage.
- jsdalton 5y ago
  This article from Martin Fowler explores your point in greater depth. It's a good read: https://martinfowler.com/articles/is-quality-worth-cost.html https://martinfowler.com/articles/is-quality-worth-cost.html One concrete problem with technical debt the article highlights is it that negatively impacts the time to deliver new features. Customers today usually expect not only a great initial feature set from a product, but also a steady stream of improvements and growth, along with responsiveness to feedback and pain points.
wnolens 5y ago
> Customers care about the outcome, not the internal process Additionally, the business cares about the outcome, not the internal process. Ostensibly, the business should care about process but it actually doesn't matter as long as the product is just good enough to obtain/retain customers, and the people spending the money (managers) aren't incentivized to make costs any lower than previously promised (status quo).
listenallyall 5y ago
Just curious, why do you mention you work at AWS if you're just disclaiming that fact in the next sentence? Besides, nothing you stated is specific to AWS or any of its products.
- sealjam 5y ago
  Crudely speaking, the fact that they work at AWS means that it’s in their best interests for AWS to be perceived positively. When this is the case it’s often nice to state this conflict of interest, so others can take your appraisal in the appropriate context. I’m not implying anything about the post, just stating what I assume to be the reason for the disclosure.
- sokoloff 5y ago
  I don't work at Amazon, but our company's social media policy requires us to be transparent about a possible conflict of interest when speaking about things "close to" our company/our position in the industry and also need to be clear about whether we're speaking in an official capacity or in a personal capacity. This is designed to reduce the chances of eager employees going out and astro-turfing or otherwise acting in trust-damaging ways while thinking they're "helping".

salil999 5y ago

Exactly this. I was too young at the time to grasp this idea.

chrisfosterelli 5y ago

> Customers care about the outcome, not the internal process. This is true though there's only so much technical debt and internal process chaos you can create before it affects the outcome. It's a leading indicator, so by the time customers are feeling that pain you've got a lot of work in front of you before you can turn it around, if at all, and customers are not going to be happy for that duration. Technical debt is not something to completely defeat or completely ignore, instead it's a tradeoff to manage.

jsdalton 5y ago
This article from Martin Fowler explores your point in greater depth. It's a good read: https://martinfowler.com/articles/is-quality-worth-cost.html https://martinfowler.com/articles/is-quality-worth-cost.html One concrete problem with technical debt the article highlights is it that negatively impacts the time to deliver new features. Customers today usually expect not only a great initial feature set from a product, but also a steady stream of improvements and growth, along with responsiveness to feedback and pain points.

wnolens 5y ago

> Customers care about the outcome, not the internal process Additionally, the business cares about the outcome, not the internal process. Ostensibly, the business should care about process but it actually doesn't matter as long as the product is just good enough to obtain/retain customers, and the people spending the money (managers) aren't incentivized to make costs any lower than previously promised (status quo).

listenallyall 5y ago

Just curious, why do you mention you work at AWS if you're just disclaiming that fact in the next sentence? Besides, nothing you stated is specific to AWS or any of its products.

sealjam 5y ago
Crudely speaking, the fact that they work at AWS means that it’s in their best interests for AWS to be perceived positively. When this is the case it’s often nice to state this conflict of interest, so others can take your appraisal in the appropriate context. I’m not implying anything about the post, just stating what I assume to be the reason for the disclosure.
sokoloff 5y ago
I don't work at Amazon, but our company's social media policy requires us to be transparent about a possible conflict of interest when speaking about things "close to" our company/our position in the industry and also need to be clear about whether we're speaking in an official capacity or in a personal capacity. This is designed to reduce the chances of eager employees going out and astro-turfing or otherwise acting in trust-damaging ways while thinking they're "helping".