4 ms·

You get the feeling ol Martin has been out of the game too long? It feels like he's only catching up with what many have been doing for decades building high p

You get the feeling ol Martin has been out of the game too long? It feels like he's only catching up with what many have been doing for decades building high performance teams.

bdg 3y ago
In the article he identified the authors are moving the platform concept to a "grouping" instead of a team. This is a very recent development that mostly only people who are active in the community know about.
- dusanh 3y ago
  Isn't that just a team of people now called a different word?
  - bdg 3y ago
    No, it groups together teams. Teams do not group teams.
xarope 3y ago
I was about to give some feedback and quote my favourite author Jorge Luis Borges, but then I realised Martin has already done something similar: George Box neatly quipped: "all models are wrong, some are useful". Thus Team Topologies is wrong: complex organizations cannot be simply broken down into just four kinds of teams and three kinds of interactions. But constraints like this are what makes a model useful. Team Topologies is a tool that impels people to evolve their organization into a more effective way of operating, one that allows stream-aligned teams to maximize their flow by lightening their cognitive load. So I am thankful that there are people like Martin Fowler who are willing to write up and remind some of us, who have perhaps forgotten more than others have learnt, that we may continue to avoid the consequences of that aphorism: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”
pvdoom 3y ago
God I hate the phrase "high performance teams". Its one of those buzzwords, that doesn't have a clear meaning, but most of the time it turns into "people that deliver a lot but also work a lot of overtime at a killer pace". Most organisations don't even have a clear picture of what performance means, so it defaults to deliver more and work more ...
oaiey 3y ago
Well when the whole world is reading, you only publish what is really "solid" ... and that means ... not that ground-breaking. So I think you are right, he is catching up. Just I think the motivation is more "do not screw my reputation/company up" instead of the "out of the game too long". On the other side: You can be perfectly right ;)

You get the feeling ol Martin has been out of the game too long? It feels like he's only catching up with what many have been doing for decades building high performance teams.

bdg 3y ago

In the article he identified the authors are moving the platform concept to a "grouping" instead of a team. This is a very recent development that mostly only people who are active in the community know about.

dusanh 3y ago
Isn't that just a team of people now called a different word?
- bdg 3y ago
  No, it groups together teams. Teams do not group teams.

xarope 3y ago

I was about to give some feedback and quote my favourite author Jorge Luis Borges, but then I realised Martin has already done something similar: George Box neatly quipped: "all models are wrong, some are useful". Thus Team Topologies is wrong: complex organizations cannot be simply broken down into just four kinds of teams and three kinds of interactions. But constraints like this are what makes a model useful. Team Topologies is a tool that impels people to evolve their organization into a more effective way of operating, one that allows stream-aligned teams to maximize their flow by lightening their cognitive load. So I am thankful that there are people like Martin Fowler who are willing to write up and remind some of us, who have perhaps forgotten more than others have learnt, that we may continue to avoid the consequences of that aphorism: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

pvdoom 3y ago

God I hate the phrase "high performance teams". Its one of those buzzwords, that doesn't have a clear meaning, but most of the time it turns into "people that deliver a lot but also work a lot of overtime at a killer pace". Most organisations don't even have a clear picture of what performance means, so it defaults to deliver more and work more ...

oaiey 3y ago

Well when the whole world is reading, you only publish what is really "solid" ... and that means ... not that ground-breaking. So I think you are right, he is catching up. Just I think the motivation is more "do not screw my reputation/company up" instead of the "out of the game too long". On the other side: You can be perfectly right ;)