3 ms·

Modularity is how you escape this and is actually how Apple achieves extreme alignment at massive scale while not completely seizing up. You push the points of

Modularity is how you escape this and is actually how Apple achieves extreme alignment at massive scale while not completely seizing up. You push the points of interaction to very few, very well-managed interfaces and allow modules (teams, services, components) to operate freely within those confines. Bezos’ famous API memo is another extreme example.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
esafak 2y ago
I know Amazon's API model, but not Apple's. Does anyone have any reading material?
- teitoklien 2y ago
  This is a good and detailed post about how apple operates during steve job and tim cool era, along with the difference between apple and other large companies along with cool examples about how it looks in reality from Harvard Business Review [0] - [0](https://hbr.org/2020/11/how-apple-is-organized-for-innovation https://hbr.org/2020/11/how-apple-is-organized-for-innovatio...)
highcountess 2y ago
Could you elaborate on that or maybe provide a source to read up on that approach and how it is implemented?
- llamaimperative 2y ago
  I don’t know in practical terms how Apple does it, I only know that they must do it because otherwise they couldn’t produce an artifact as complex as the iPhone. You can know for a fact they utilize modularity by opening up an iPhone and seeing… modules! A few things to read in the general area of this theory though… Short and highly specific: Bezos’ API memo — https://konghq.com/blog/enterprise/api-mandate https://konghq.com/blog/enterprise/api-mandate An actual book that’s a bit broader but touches on system coupling/decoupling and is very practical for software people: Wiring the Winning Organization by Gene Kim An excellent, very approachable primer on the overarching field of thought, which is systems theory, is Donella Meadows’ “Thinking in Systems” Going back to more of the philosophical foundation (along with other valuable business ethics lessons), you should look into the work of W Edwards Deming and his “System of Profound Knowledge” — sounds pretentious but is EXTREMELY practical. This region of thought forms the basis of e.g. the Toyota Production System And an absolutely excellent but more academic deep dive into precisely this topic of modularity is Carliss Baldwin’s “Design Rules.” It’s sort of a super-theory of Conway’s Law, but in a book-length argument.
  - actionfromafar 2y ago
    Noted
Chyzwar 2y ago
Alignment is not a technical problem. It is a human issue that can be solved by leadership. Bezos is successful not because of API memo but because of his decision process and leadership. Lex interview with Bezos. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DcWqzZ3I2cY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DcWqzZ3I2cY
- llamaimperative 2y ago
  “Alignment” and certainly leadership isn’t sufficient to prevent a highly complex, highly interdependent system from becoming totally unresolvable, i.e. impossible to work on or within. Amazon could hardly ship software due to complex interdependencies which is why Bezos’ decision process and leadership compelled him to modularize and decouple the various systems and teams. If he hadn’t done that (to greater or lesser degree), it wouldn’t matter how hard he whipped the horses. I didn’t say Amazon is successful “because” of the API memo nor did I say alignment is a technical problem.
  - Chyzwar 2y ago
    > “Alignment” and certainly leadership isn’t sufficient to prevent a highly complex, highly interdependent system from becoming totally unresolvable, i.e. impossible to work on or within. Yes, but Leadership is a necessary condition for alignment to happen. > Bezos’ decision process and leadership compelled him to modularize and decouple the various systems and teams That is the essence of leadership. Make an important decision and have people follow it. If Bezos just made a decision but not enforce it, he would not reach same scale Amazon and created AWS as by product. > You push the points of interaction to very few, very well-managed interfaces and allow modules (teams, services, components) to operate freely within those confines. > nor did I say alignment is a technical problem. For me, you suggested technical approaches either via process, organisation, and technology.
    - llamaimperative 2y ago
      I don’t know what you’re arguing against.
brailsafe 2y ago
From what I gathered in an interview once, Apple also tends to prefer autonomy and annual timelines over high frequency sync ups, but I never got far enough to know how far that goes. Actually seems like a dream and I'd love to get another shot at it.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

esafak 2y ago

I know Amazon's API model, but not Apple's. Does anyone have any reading material?

teitoklien 2y ago
This is a good and detailed post about how apple operates during steve job and tim cool era, along with the difference between apple and other large companies along with cool examples about how it looks in reality from Harvard Business Review [0] - [0](https://hbr.org/2020/11/how-apple-is-organized-for-innovation https://hbr.org/2020/11/how-apple-is-organized-for-innovatio...)

highcountess 2y ago

Could you elaborate on that or maybe provide a source to read up on that approach and how it is implemented?

llamaimperative 2y ago
I don’t know in practical terms how Apple does it, I only know that they must do it because otherwise they couldn’t produce an artifact as complex as the iPhone. You can know for a fact they utilize modularity by opening up an iPhone and seeing… modules! A few things to read in the general area of this theory though… Short and highly specific: Bezos’ API memo — https://konghq.com/blog/enterprise/api-mandate https://konghq.com/blog/enterprise/api-mandate An actual book that’s a bit broader but touches on system coupling/decoupling and is very practical for software people: Wiring the Winning Organization by Gene Kim An excellent, very approachable primer on the overarching field of thought, which is systems theory, is Donella Meadows’ “Thinking in Systems” Going back to more of the philosophical foundation (along with other valuable business ethics lessons), you should look into the work of W Edwards Deming and his “System of Profound Knowledge” — sounds pretentious but is EXTREMELY practical. This region of thought forms the basis of e.g. the Toyota Production System And an absolutely excellent but more academic deep dive into precisely this topic of modularity is Carliss Baldwin’s “Design Rules.” It’s sort of a super-theory of Conway’s Law, but in a book-length argument.
- actionfromafar 2y ago
  Noted

Chyzwar 2y ago

Alignment is not a technical problem. It is a human issue that can be solved by leadership. Bezos is successful not because of API memo but because of his decision process and leadership. Lex interview with Bezos. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DcWqzZ3I2cY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DcWqzZ3I2cY

llamaimperative 2y ago
“Alignment” and certainly leadership isn’t sufficient to prevent a highly complex, highly interdependent system from becoming totally unresolvable, i.e. impossible to work on or within. Amazon could hardly ship software due to complex interdependencies which is why Bezos’ decision process and leadership compelled him to modularize and decouple the various systems and teams. If he hadn’t done that (to greater or lesser degree), it wouldn’t matter how hard he whipped the horses. I didn’t say Amazon is successful “because” of the API memo nor did I say alignment is a technical problem.
- Chyzwar 2y ago
  > “Alignment” and certainly leadership isn’t sufficient to prevent a highly complex, highly interdependent system from becoming totally unresolvable, i.e. impossible to work on or within. Yes, but Leadership is a necessary condition for alignment to happen. > Bezos’ decision process and leadership compelled him to modularize and decouple the various systems and teams That is the essence of leadership. Make an important decision and have people follow it. If Bezos just made a decision but not enforce it, he would not reach same scale Amazon and created AWS as by product. > You push the points of interaction to very few, very well-managed interfaces and allow modules (teams, services, components) to operate freely within those confines. > nor did I say alignment is a technical problem. For me, you suggested technical approaches either via process, organisation, and technology.
  - llamaimperative 2y ago
    I don’t know what you’re arguing against.

brailsafe 2y ago

From what I gathered in an interview once, Apple also tends to prefer autonomy and annual timelines over high frequency sync ups, but I never got far enough to know how far that goes. Actually seems like a dream and I'd love to get another shot at it.