4 ms·

In my opinion the best antidote to overly complex architectures is to have engineering teams and the engineers in them be rewarded based on actual business outc

In my opinion the best antidote to overly complex architectures is to have engineering teams and the engineers in them be rewarded based on actual business outcomes. I suspect the era of VC-money and ZIRP led to a large number of engineers who were disconnected from successful long-term business outcomes, so there was no incentive to simplify.

jedrek 3y ago
This only makes sense if the engineering teams own the process from end to end, at which point they stop being engineering teams.
- throwaway2037 3y ago
  I agree. In my experience, this exists in a few, rare (investment bank) trading floor technology teams. From a distance, it looks like traders who are programmers.
- glenjamin 3y ago
  A sales team gets measured on the sales they make - but they don't own the end to end process of building the thing that they're selling. It's entirely possible to measure teams on business outcomes without having them own things end-to-end, but to be really effective in this they'll need to collaborate with the other teams across the company - which is generally a desirable outcome.
throwaway2037 3y ago
What is this obsession on HN about "everything can explained with the end of ZIRP" (zero interest rate policy)? Really: Even with overnight rates at 5%, the returns are still awful compared to even moderatly successful VC firms. And, I do not write this as a fanboi/gurl for VCs. (Many have shitty, immoral business practices to enrich themselves at the expense of hard-working non-executive staff.) Also, "end of VC-money": No such thing. They are practically bursting at the seams with uninvested money gathered during ZIRP.
- glenjamin 3y ago
  Are you suggesting that the macroeconomic environment in terms of funding and performance expectations of startups hasn't changed signficantly in the last few years? VC-money and ZIRP is a convenient shorthand for what's changed, neither are terms I think particularly encapsulate what did change, but I think it's very hard to argue that it's still just as easy to get a bunch of funding without a business model. (aside from in AI perhaps?)

jedrek 3y ago

This only makes sense if the engineering teams own the process from end to end, at which point they stop being engineering teams.

throwaway2037 3y ago
I agree. In my experience, this exists in a few, rare (investment bank) trading floor technology teams. From a distance, it looks like traders who are programmers.
glenjamin 3y ago
A sales team gets measured on the sales they make - but they don't own the end to end process of building the thing that they're selling. It's entirely possible to measure teams on business outcomes without having them own things end-to-end, but to be really effective in this they'll need to collaborate with the other teams across the company - which is generally a desirable outcome.

throwaway2037 3y ago

What is this obsession on HN about "everything can explained with the end of ZIRP" (zero interest rate policy)? Really: Even with overnight rates at 5%, the returns are still awful compared to even moderatly successful VC firms. And, I do not write this as a fanboi/gurl for VCs. (Many have shitty, immoral business practices to enrich themselves at the expense of hard-working non-executive staff.) Also, "end of VC-money": No such thing. They are practically bursting at the seams with uninvested money gathered during ZIRP.

glenjamin 3y ago
Are you suggesting that the macroeconomic environment in terms of funding and performance expectations of startups hasn't changed signficantly in the last few years? VC-money and ZIRP is a convenient shorthand for what's changed, neither are terms I think particularly encapsulate what did change, but I think it's very hard to argue that it's still just as easy to get a bunch of funding without a business model. (aside from in AI perhaps?)