No law of software has proven more true in my experience than Conway's Law, which states: > organizations which design systems (in the broad sense used here) a

No law of software has proven more true in my experience than Conway's Law, which states: > organizations which design systems (in the broad sense used here) are constrained to produce designs which are copies of the communication structures of these organizations. The reddit thread comes to the same conclusion, but doesn't frame it this way. This is how I react to good and bad software, and when I see a confused mess of an app coming from a large organization, I think "every VP or director in this bureaucracy had their fingers in the pie, and this app reflects internal backbiting rather than a single unified vision." And when I see an app with heart, good bones, competent in the implementation, but which is ruined by some crucial flaw, I think there must be a persuasive figure in the organization who rode in after it was halfway done, and championed some bad product choice they really cared about, usually for selfish reasons. And if a miracle occurs, and when a huge organization produces some successful, well-scoped product, it is inevitably discovered that someone was given a budget and more or less ignored by the chain of command, and was able to ship something good under their noses—and if it is successful, expect version 2.0 to be have been meddled with.