4 ms·
> Why the hell hire super smart people when you have to tell them how to do things? A very hard question. One side is that every smart engineer will do what's
by hyperhopper 3y ago
> Why the hell hire super smart people when you have to tell them how to do things?
A very hard question. One side is that every smart engineer will do what's best for their use case.
The other is now you might have 100 smart engineers with 100 smart different solutions which can cause repeated work, integration issues, missed common solutions, etc.
Both approaches have lots of pros cons and tradeoffs
- jpgvm 3y agoGenerally the best approach there is to elevate a bunch of your smartest engineers into an architecture team that a) set good standards but also b) appreciates the nuance of problems sufficiently to know when to deviate. A small team can probably only handle one tech stack, an org with 10 teams can probably handle 10 stacks if they needed to but can get efficiency by standardising on some number less than 10. However making those calls shouldn't be coming down from the CTO, it should be made among the architects that actually design and build the systems.
- phil-m 3y agoWhere I'd consider a (good) CTO should be somehow responsible for the high-level architectural decisions. Accumulate enough expertise and know-how (via "architects" or rather very senior engineers) and then discuss the pros/cons and at the end weigh each argument and decide what may work best.
- j45 3y agoThe smart have to design for the average of devs and not the smartest. The smart design for easily creating beginners in thenfuture to work with what exists. Too often smart devs have to be clever with coding, where clever architecture can often be more flexible.