3 ms·
I've always used this as my basis for thinking about team sizes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Magical_Number_Seven,_Plus_or_Minus_Two https://en.wikipedia.
by neom 1y ago
I've always used this as my basis for thinking about team sizes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Magical_Number_Seven,_Plus_or_Minus_Two https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Magical_Number_Seven,_Plus... - personally I say teams are ideally 4 -/+ 2 only.
In Leading Teams[1] J. Richard Hackman says 6 max based on this research: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2786271 https://www.jstor.org/stable/2786271
[1]https://books.google.com/books/about/Leading_Teams.html?id=wkgxCgAAQBAJ&source=kp_book_description https://books.google.com/books/about/Leading_Teams.html?id=w...
- hanifbbz 1y agoI don’t know. With the advent of AI-productivity tools (regardless of where we stand in how much the actual boost is), EMS should be able to offload part of their admin work and devs should be able to deliver more and faster. Long way to say that I'm skeptic if those numbers still apply in modern or near future environment.
- neom 1y agoThat's a really interesting perspective that I hadn't considered!! Per the first link, a lot of these ideas are based on how well a human can manage in their head what another human knows/doesn't know/is doing/isn't doing/etc. We can only manage so much of that. I still don't think a human can manage more than 6/7 complexities, and so I don't know if I think 1 human would be able to work with say 30 AI agents as 1 team, for example. Could 1 human work with 1 agent who controls 1000s of AIs, I think so, is this the part you think changes?