4 ms·
IME, it has usually stemmed from "that's how everyone else is doing it, so we should too" without considering specific use/business cases. Senior management wer
by Lyngbakr 3y ago
IME, it has usually stemmed from "that's how everyone else is doing it, so we should too" without considering specific use/business cases. Senior management were simply not willing to deviate from the norm.
- tharkun__ 3y agoAnd also: I need a job. My job/workplace has these tools. They are usable for my job and if I were to question the tools that would come on top of my workload, so I use them even if I know that cheaper tools were used at my last job. Do I care if they pay my salary and the tools are usable?
- tadfisher 3y agoThat's perfectly reasonable, but it sounds like you're saying the tools work for your use case. So long as the executive/management level is evaluating the cost-benefit of other tools, and is receptive to voices from ICs, then there's no problem to solve. It's just not what the GP is describing. In some orgs you end up with these expensive, standard-ish "suites" that are way too generalized, don't solve business needs as efficiently as other tools, are painful for ICs to use to meet requirements, and it seems like no one can really explain why these tools are being used over something else other than rumors (the previous CTO came from this vendor, we got a sweetheart deal 10 billing cycles ago, etc.). So really this an issue of ownership; someone needs to be accountable for infrastructure decisions and outcomes, and it's way healthier for an org if ICs are aligned with management on the same. It sounds like you're not in that sort of org, so good for you.
- CRConrad 3y agoBut do you care if they pay your salary and the tools are barely usable?