Comment

Comment by ereyes01

I think an important qualifying question is: how does your team/company deal with failures? Is there some other carrot/stick that incentivizes developers to behave this way?

There's certainly a rational argument to be made that a project's progress is important and lines of "acceptable quality" should be drawn somewhere, but people are often not rational and respond to other things, and that's probably where your problem lies, IMO.

For example- I used to work in a team that maintained an enterprise UNIX kernel, and we had a space shuttle - like culture of obsessive failure prevention using meticulous process and checks, because the cost of a failure could mean [m|b]illions of dollars at our customer sites. I now create startups, and the incentives are the absolute opposite- I need to get _something_, _anything_ out the door as soon as possible because the most important question I need to answer is "does anyone want this?"

The reasons for either approach are not technical, and the source of your frustration, I suspect, is deeper than "convincing developers" (though I look forward to hearing what you have to say).

EDIT: this post also expands a bit on the carrots/sticks I was referring to above: https://www.verica.io/inhumanity-of-root-cause-analysis/

parent ereyes01 7 years ago

Discussion

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton