Conversation

Whichever way you slice it, "clean" handoffs between stages of the software development process create friction and leave each role frustrated due to lack of influence into neighboring spaces. The solution is working in parallel, not expanding your "slice" until burnout. 1/

Diagram showing 6 rough stages of software development: business strategy, user research, UX, UI, front end, and back end engineering. There are four columns with stacked roles and red lines between the roles signifying friction. The first column has product manager, UX/UI designer, and full stack dev roles. The second one has PM, UX designer, UI engineer, and back end dev. The third one has many roles side by side rather than stacked, showing that they work together and there's no "true" handoff. The fourth column just has "unicorn"; it is crossed out.

read image description

ALT

343

This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more

Replying to

and

I love this thread but would be curious to see a more detailed criticism of aiming for unicorns! I've seen/experienced lots of problems there, of course, but they don't quite add up to "no no no," so I imagine you have something else in mind.

6:00 PM · Sep 28, 2020Twitter Web App

Replying to

and

"We will simply hire one person with all the skills" has always struck me as an alternative to a coherent process, rather than a building block. Mostly because it results in very inconsistent performance across any particular stage, and 80-hour weeks.

Quote Tweet

Pavel A. Samsonov

@PavelASamsonov

· Aug 20, 2019

10x PM: ½x project management ½x product owner ½x researcher ½x UX designer ½x UI designer ½x facilitator ½x info arch ½x business analyst ½x eng lead ... Too bad ½*½*½... is less than 0.001. twitter.com/johncutlefish/…

Show this thread

Andy Matuschak

@andy_matuschak

Sep 28, 2020

👍 Yep, that rings true. Often the wrong trade to make, I agree—though not sure it’s worth dismissing out of hand. When is it the right trade? In some cases it’s probably cheaper, all-in. And some states in possiblity space do seem to require “everything in one person’s head."

Show replies