The cited article from Ken Kantzer is also very good: https://kenkantzer.com/learnings-from-5-years-of-tech-startup-code-audits/ https://kenkantzer.com/learnin

The cited article from Ken Kantzer is also very good: https://kenkantzer.com/learnings-from-5-years-of-tech-startup-code-audits/ https://kenkantzer.com/learnings-from-5-years-of-tech-startu... "You don’t need hundreds of engineers to build a great product. I wrote a longer piece about this, but essentially, despite the general stage of startup we audited being pretty similar, the engineering team sizes varied a lot. Surprisingly, sometimes the most impressive products with the broadest scope of features were built by the smaller teams. And it was these same “small but mighty” teams that, years later, are crushing their markets. Simple Outperformed Smart. As a self-admitted elitist, it pains me to say this, but it’s true: the startups we audited that are now doing the best usually had an almost brazenly ‘Keep It Simple’ approach to engineering. Cleverness for cleverness sake was abhorred. On the flip side, the companies where we were like ”woah, these folks are smart as hell” for the most part kind of faded. Generally, the major foot-gun (which I talk about more in a previous post on foot-guns) that got a lot of places in trouble was the premature move to microservices, architectures that relied on distributed computing, and messaging-heavy designs."