3 ms·
> good luck as an engineer explaining how and when exactly your investment in developer tooling is going to make the company $10M in Q2. My experience is that
by everforward 4y ago
> good luck as an engineer explaining how and when exactly your investment in developer tooling is going to make the company $10M in Q2.
My experience is that most engineers don't try, because they don't tend to speak finance. A lot of developer tooling is roughly quantifiable; this tool saves X minutes while doing Y, do a little survey to see how often people do Y, multiply Y and X to get time saved per year. Divide X*Y by the number of work minutes in a year, and you have the number of man-years saved. Multiply that by the average salary of an engineer, and that's very roughly how much the dev tooling is "worth". It's not a precise answer, because 50 employees saving a couple hours of time a week isn't the same as having another employee, but it's a workable approximation.
> the solution was to invest in the problem proactively starting 2 years earlier, and now that you're so late it's going to take 4 years to solve the problem because you have to first deal with all the debt you accrued.
This can also be roughly quantified. Get rough numbers on the resources required to fix the problem now. Look at what's coming for the next year or two in terms of projects and infrastructure that will exacerbate the issue, figure up roughly how much effort it will take to fix those. Convert that effort number into salaries, and you have a rough idea of what the cost of delaying the fix is.
If you're worried about tech debt causing a catastrophic failure, figure out what that scenario looks like, calculate up the concrete costs of the failure (SLA violations, refunds, etc), then have another column for potential costs like regulatory fines, and a third column for things that have costs that the finance people are better suited to handle (what's the cost of reputation loss?). Again, it's unlikely to be completely accurate, but it gives you a data-based platform to speak from.
Even better is to engage the finance department to help draw up those numbers. Money is their forte, and calling them in to help with money questions is the same as calling in the frontend people to help with React or whatever.
I think sometimes we engineers spend too much time around other engineers and get too comfortable speaking in terms of engineering priorities. Those don't extrapolate; finance and legal don't give 2 shits about "flaky unit tests". We have to convert those engineering priorities into other teams' priorities if we want them to care. Finance cares about money, so rephrase the engineering problem into a money one. Legal cares about liability, so rephrase the problem into a liability.
- matthewdgreen 4y agoThe measure of a good CEO is their ability to oversee an operation that “doesn’t speak finance” and/or to staff the executive ranks with people who can translate priorities into terms that can be reasoned over financially. When a company fails to do this the blame lies with the executive leadership, not the operational employees on the ground. This is supposed to be the reason executives are well-paid.
- tracerbulletx 4y agoAs an ex-accountant turned engineer, financial communication and quantification skills may not be enough. Leadership might not actually care about the death by a thousand cuts their crusty operations will cause in a few years, or they often choose to not believe any inconvenient estimates. That said, I agree it's really your only option to try, and also that engineers need to realize the business exists solely because of the money it generates.
- mindslight 4y agoThis thread revolves around a terrible assumption that the financial profession should inherently be in charge, and that it is only natural for everyone else to have to speak their language. This financialization of everything is exactly how so many companies have been hollowed out from the inside. Rather, the people who should be running things are those that know how to do the core work of the company. For most companies this is not finance. For an airline, this means that the software department should be speaking the language of operations and logistics when justifying how the new system will be better and what it will look like when the current one fails.
- AtlasBarfed 4y agoWhy bother speaking finance? The rub here is that finance,lingua franca /secret handshake of the executive caste, demands proportional compensation on top of large salaries for their "contributions". If I as an engineer make the company a billion or save it two million, do I get the same compensation awards? Yeah no I'm in the peon class. I'd get a plaque or maybe "distinguished" in front of my title.
- 4y ago