this post was submitted on 21 Mar 2024
18 points (95.0% liked)
Programming
17333 readers
500 users here now
Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!
Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.
Hope you enjoy the instance!
Rules
Rules
- Follow the programming.dev instance rules
- Keep content related to programming in some way
- If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos
Wormhole
Follow the wormhole through a path of communities [email protected]
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Getting stuff down in writing is a good step; crucial for sure. But the process/ritual of decision logs doesn't necessarily get you great analysis or effective outcomes. Two stories:
I've read decision logs and design docs that have included this kind of reasoning. Many meetings, everyone gets their say, it's all written down. One time, I arrived a year or two into a project and I could indeed see how exactly they came to the decision that they did. The problem was that the reasoning was super weak. Over-emphasis on process, little on problem solving skills.
Other teams I've been on were fantastic problem solvers but super sloppy. If the right people were around, in the same room, they could solve things more cleanly in a fraction of the time of some company 10x the size. But for new staff, or if those key people were not around: chaos!
I guess my conclusion is that effective decision-making comes down to balancing a whole bunch of different behaviour.
In short: software is tricky.
Sure, decision logs is just a step to fix a problems with decision making. Logs highlight a problems in decision making process and let you analyze a problems in your team. You still need an strong architect who may say "hey team, why your arguments so weak? it looks you are low skill engineers. make arguments more objective, or you will be fired" and then really fire weak engineers in team.
Yeah good point.
In that process-heavy project I joined, I could quickly see the problems; about 2 or 3 days. That meant when I was submitting code or reviewing the backlog I knew what kind of challenges I could make, and what would just be a waste of time. In others, it could take way longer - months! - to learn how the team actually deals with challenges and design.