In software development, we struggle with our own thoughts for the directions we take. Strive for the shiny new object to develop with? Use our current tools or take a risk on a newly released tools for new project? What is real and what is driven by our desires and personal wants.
We like to think that we make rational decisions but we don't. We fool ourselves by pretending contraary evidence does not exist or apply for the decisions we make. This can get us in to big trouble.
This is not limited to indivuals but to companies as well. Google has been denying that fragmentation is a problem with the Android ecosystem. That what worked for the phones would work for tablets (it doesn't). Adding fragments that require even more resources, id, files and references should work fine for larger screen sizes (it doesn't). Tablets are just like phones except we can just place more of the same existing views on the screen at the same time, it will work fine (it doesn't). Tablets are different.
Facebook knows HTML, JS and PHP, so it decided to build it's mobile applications with these tools instead of going native. What's good for the web is good for the device (it's not). Now they are reverting back to going native for iOS. They can fool themselves but they can not fool the users.
The read up of Palm when creating their new OS for phones is a fascinating reading. No-not WebOS, the one before WebOS that failed when WebOS was quickly put together to get something out. The story of Nokia and it's OS decisions. Even Microsoft and the reasoning for Windows 8 RT (on ARM). Very interesting stories and justifications.
The desire to justify your choices by pretending that major issues do not really exists or somehow do not apply is not limited to individuals but also companies. It just the different side of the same coin.
The main difference between personal and corporate choices is the possible impact on others. I accept failure (and even expect and learn from it), but company choices have risk for other employees that have not say in justification (or self deception) that is used for major directions.
There are times the risks are worth it or when major changes are called for (thinking of RIM here) but it's important to understand why decisions are made and the personal thoughts that go into them.
Should companies have a couple of Buddhists on staff for reality checks?
We like to think that we make rational decisions but we don't. We fool ourselves by pretending contraary evidence does not exist or apply for the decisions we make. This can get us in to big trouble.
This is not limited to indivuals but to companies as well. Google has been denying that fragmentation is a problem with the Android ecosystem. That what worked for the phones would work for tablets (it doesn't). Adding fragments that require even more resources, id, files and references should work fine for larger screen sizes (it doesn't). Tablets are just like phones except we can just place more of the same existing views on the screen at the same time, it will work fine (it doesn't). Tablets are different.
Facebook knows HTML, JS and PHP, so it decided to build it's mobile applications with these tools instead of going native. What's good for the web is good for the device (it's not). Now they are reverting back to going native for iOS. They can fool themselves but they can not fool the users.
The read up of Palm when creating their new OS for phones is a fascinating reading. No-not WebOS, the one before WebOS that failed when WebOS was quickly put together to get something out. The story of Nokia and it's OS decisions. Even Microsoft and the reasoning for Windows 8 RT (on ARM). Very interesting stories and justifications.
The desire to justify your choices by pretending that major issues do not really exists or somehow do not apply is not limited to individuals but also companies. It just the different side of the same coin.
The main difference between personal and corporate choices is the possible impact on others. I accept failure (and even expect and learn from it), but company choices have risk for other employees that have not say in justification (or self deception) that is used for major directions.
There are times the risks are worth it or when major changes are called for (thinking of RIM here) but it's important to understand why decisions are made and the personal thoughts that go into them.
Should companies have a couple of Buddhists on staff for reality checks?
Comments
Post a Comment