Ok, I’m sorry, I’m going to ruffle feathers here but… I’m trying to read some newer development process books and… oh my… even super popular ones are so immensely long winded and unconvincing in their dogmatic argumentation: this is bad, this is good, because I said so that’s why.
Recent examples that I’m struggling to finish: “Team Topologies” and “Data Mesh” - I mean they might be great but I’m getting strong “this should’ve been a blogpost” feels.
I can’t. “This is how you simplify things for these silly dev folks who struggle to understand even basic stuff.”
“How to break down large domains”
If you think that there is a Perfect Org Breakdown for all the things I believe you don’t know anything about anything.
“Here is example number four of a team who struggled to keep up with requests after a lot of people started to use, love and depend on the thing the team had built”
“They are struggling because… actually… they are extremely dysfunctional and not actually… extremely successful”
Grrrrr 😡
I’m sure they TALKED WITH THEIR USERS ☠️ fuck that monolith behavior.
And I sound smart and deep because AND THIS IS AN ACTUAL LITERAL QUOTE: “a stream should flow unimpeded”
I am deceased 💀
@[email protected] not sure what's worse, but it's useful to have a look so you know when someone have been too inspired https://teamtopologies.com/talks
@Patricia companies don't give people time to think in the neverending quest to do more with less
So people turn to "thought leaders" to think for them
Like the emperor's new clothes, nobody ever asks "are these thoughts good?" They just follow the thought leaders like lemmings
Really appreciate your critical evaluation of these concepts
@Patricia this must be what the ceo of the company that just retrenched me and half the tech team (including getting rid of the whole QA and Ops teams) must have read on his holidays. so now devs will spec, plan, architect, dev, qa, deploy, monitor, and maintain new and old code
edit: sorry, forgot - write documentation
@Patricia Quite a lot of people who live or work in well-designed buildings can tell you what they like about those places.
Far fewer of them can explain, even in principle, how those places were designed or built.
@Patricia I remember attending a lecture in Uni in Project Management Engineering or something like that.
In the first ine they showed this really american corporate sound thing full of Agile/etc buzzwords and I then and there decided this entire class was bullshit, a waste of everyones time and I never went to another lecture and decided to put in the lowest amount of effort to be able to pass.
Interestingly this class was quite easy to bullshit your way through and I suspect that’s true of the field in general. I never did that with a single other class, but this one just reeked of bullshit.
It’s kinda too bad: because how you manage and organize a software project is important!
@Patricia OK, ok … now I probably won't buy/read this book, after all. So: Thanks for the super-entertaining (for me, mind you) review.
I do understand that it must have been (I'm missing the right words here) … an interesting exercise, to say the least.
@Patricia I have read this whole thread but I still don't understand what exactly your actual criticism of Team Topologies actually is.
Ignoring the ad hominem stuff, what specific things are wrong or problematic?
What foundational principles would *you* use to organise work in teams in the context of fast flow of value?
I'm genuinely open to new perspectives that are reasoned and well articulated. 💪🏼
@Patricia I would love to explore and share ideas with you before then but happy to wait if that's your preference.
For clarity and transparency, the core Team Topologies operation is now not-for-profit: I have committed to take no dividends from that core operation.
We also blocked the certificate circus route years ago: https://teamtopologies.com/certification
My work on TT is a genuine attempt to make things better for people and orgs worldwide, not a get rich quick Ponzi scheme. 👍🏼
@Patricia but I actually meant it the other way around. If you you really don't feel that there is truth in what is said, then you'll need to bend over backwards to try and make sense of the logic that is presented.
The other way around is also true. If the reasoning I hear supports that what I feel is right, it's making me happier in my bubble. Welcome to the world of echo chambers.
I always struggle with all of these cultural models, because everyone tries to sell a one size fits all. Doesn't exist. If nothing else helps, quote Yōji Akao: Copy the spirit, not the form.
Do they want the right thing? People to feel good about the work they do, the fulfillment of having done a good job? If so (I have only watched snippets of the video so can't really tell) then cherry pick the things that make sense to you and ignore the rest that doesn't.
@Patricia Spotify model mostly was an aspirational diagram, not a case study.
Patricia Aas
Tom Larrow
hallvors
Elizabeth Zagroba
Kenn White
cuan_knaggs
Mrs Beanbag
Ruth — of systems & design
Jonas Winje
Einar W. Høst
Edwin Young
Owen
Torb
Richard Kogelnig
Stephan
nk
wink
Mark Hoemmen
pa28
Matthew Skelton
WildEnte
Chip Collier
Maciej L
Kensan