Elizabeth AyerSep 14, 2025

Talking to friends in software orgs recently, I've been struck by commonalities across countries and sectors:

Executives are driving "efficiency," by which they mean maximizing time spent on direct value-creation activities.

BUT there's a tacit, industry-wide assumption that writing code is the only value-creating activity and that all coding generates value.

It's like everyone has prioritized instantaneous boat speed and abandoned navigation and maintenance.

Such a reckoning coming...

Show thread0xC0DEC0DE07EA
@elizayer the senior/principal engineers should know that code does not always generate value, but always incurs cost. “Should I solve this problem with code?” is a legitimate and important question to ask.
Sep 14, 2025 at 3:49pmWeb
Show threadElizabeth AyerSep 14, 2025
@c0dec0dec0de I know this is just my window on the industry, but I'm seeing these people forced out and shut down. But they're exactly the voices I'd want to hear more from, going into a time of high uncertainty.
Show thread0xC0DEC0DE07EASep 14, 2025
@elizayer there’s always a tension between business (quarterly profits, deadlines, bids) and responsible engineering. We’ve been seeing for years how there aren’t meaningful consequences in the market or from regulators for gross negligence when it comes to the tech sector; lowering the bar to ship *something* even if it’s insecure, incomplete, or fatally flawed isn’t going to help shift the balance toward good engineering, sadly.
Show threadElizabeth AyerSep 14, 2025

@c0dec0dec0de I mean yes, there is this tension until there isn't. The need for solid engineering always reasserts itself via reality, and increasingly insistently.

I'd say that Boeing is the poster child of needing to re-assimilate business-and-engineering concerns....

Watching with interest how that plays out!

Show threadMatthew SkeltonSep 14, 2025

@elizayer @c0dec0dec0de there is a case to be made in IT consulting for refusing to work with publicly traded companies (in the UK we call these PLCs) - stock market - due to the myopic quarterly results habit.

Find instead customers that have a multi-year view.

🤷

Show threadToni AittoniemiSep 14, 2025
@matthewskelton @elizayer @c0dec0dec0de Thy shalt be slaves to the stock price of OpenAI, Microsoft & Oracle, such that ever greater loans could be made against them and ”value created” for the investor class.
Show threadAvnerSep 14, 2025
@c0dec0dec0de @elizayer absolutely agreed. One way I try to socialize this mindset at work is by publicly celebrating whenever we're able to remove more code than we're creating.
Show threadElizabeth AyerSep 14, 2025

@Avner @c0dec0dec0de I agree and feel the same way about nixing features and products too!

Simplicity, manageability... these things are so valuable.

Show threadAvnerSep 14, 2025

@elizayer @c0dec0dec0de yes! It really bugs me, no pun intended, that things like stability and, as you say, manageability are rarely considered "features" by the product managers I've worked with.

Not that they don't sometimes acknowledge their importance, mind you, just that those are considered "engineering work" as opposed to "feature work."

Show threadElizabeth AyerSep 14, 2025

@Avner @c0dec0dec0de Haha, I gave a conference talk a long time ago called "The most toxic concept in product management." What was the most toxic concept? You guessed it: "feature"!

I see the separation as highly problematic... but I also acknowledge that I'm a marginal voice, getting really out of step with that community. Sigh.

Show threadAvnerSep 14, 2025

@elizayer @c0dec0dec0de I would love to see that!

It also doesn't help that engineering teams often operate from the same mindset.

Show thread0xC0DEC0DE07EASep 14, 2025
@Avner @elizayer 💡! Feature in the product management sense doesn’t actually map onto the normal linguistic use of the word. I knew this on one level, but simplicity or readability is or can be a top-level “feature” of a language or product, but never a “feature” as project management sees it.