3 ms·

Don’t argue with the consultants. It is not a hill worth dying on. And you don’t know the big picture, but the little picture is everyone agreed the consultan

Don’t argue with the consultants. It is not a hill worth dying on. And you don’t know the big picture, but the little picture is everyone agreed the consultants were the right way to decide before you were there; arguing implies the people who sign contracts and write the checks are wrong; and business decisions are about the whole business and engineering exists to support the business - not to optimize itself. To put it simply, the decision has been made by people with more experience in your organization’s culture, more authority, and a better understanding of the business as a whole. Plus your here on HN because you have not convinced the stakeholders. Good luck.

roryirvine 15d ago
That really depends on they type of consultancy, the terms of the engagement, and where the responsibility lies (for both the requirements and the outcomes). If the consultancy was brought in to do the move from Heroku but not build or run anything beyond that, then I would normally expect the client to set the tradeoff between DevEx (argues for EKS) vs simplicity/operability (argues for ECS). In that case, it would be perfectly reasonable for the OP to input into that decision. It's definitely worth speaking to whoever is responsible for engaging the consultancy - there should be an agreed Statement of Work and at least a rough RACI matrix for each deliverable, showing who the stakeholders are and how they interact.
- brudgers 14d ago
  it would be perfectly reasonable for the OP to input into that decision As a recent employee, the OP was not there when the consultants were taking input. It looks like the decision was made before the OP came on board. At this point the appropriate behavior is to accept the consensus because working together in the present is more important than a hypothetical future of possible minor benefit. And for perspective, not knowing the players is a minefield of dumbtax. Consultants often have long standing relationships with clients’ senior staff and there can be everything from holiday gift boxes to golf weekends to Vegas junkets to direct family ties. Relitigating the details of an obvious business decision is stupid on many levels.

roryirvine 15d ago

That really depends on they type of consultancy, the terms of the engagement, and where the responsibility lies (for both the requirements and the outcomes). If the consultancy was brought in to do the move from Heroku but not build or run anything beyond that, then I would normally expect the client to set the tradeoff between DevEx (argues for EKS) vs simplicity/operability (argues for ECS). In that case, it would be perfectly reasonable for the OP to input into that decision. It's definitely worth speaking to whoever is responsible for engaging the consultancy - there should be an agreed Statement of Work and at least a rough RACI matrix for each deliverable, showing who the stakeholders are and how they interact.

brudgers 14d ago
it would be perfectly reasonable for the OP to input into that decision As a recent employee, the OP was not there when the consultants were taking input. It looks like the decision was made before the OP came on board. At this point the appropriate behavior is to accept the consensus because working together in the present is more important than a hypothetical future of possible minor benefit. And for perspective, not knowing the players is a minefield of dumbtax. Consultants often have long standing relationships with clients’ senior staff and there can be everything from holiday gift boxes to golf weekends to Vegas junkets to direct family ties. Relitigating the details of an obvious business decision is stupid on many levels.