Why is it that sites like Facebook can support so many features and can be so easy to use and yet the vast majority of software systems are so ridiculously complicated and can only support a few thousand concurrent users.
“This is a very good question.” chuckled Uncle Bob.
Uncle Bob went on to explain that when you bring the people building the software closer to the people needing it good things tend to happen. Basically, agile.
And while I wholeheartedly agree with Uncle Bob’s answer, I have a few other ideas why companies like Facebook, Google, and Amazon get software right while the vast majority of us (companies) seem to get it wrong.
1. Most companies don’t live and die by their software.
For the vast majority of companies out there software is a necessary evil.
Given the choice most would rather buy their software then have to build it themselves. This attitude and lack of software expertise means most companies don’t put their heart and souls into the quality of their software and system the way say Google would.
Because these companies don’t see their software as a competitive advantage, they treat it like a deprecating asset, and let it decay over time.
2. Too many rely on QA departments.
Did you know every engineer at Facebook supports 1.2M (that’s million) users on average and they do it all without a formal QA department?
They don’t wait for someone from QA to submit a bug. Every engineer takes direct responsibility for the code they produce and works closely with operations to ensure that what they ship works, and they to support it quickly when things go wrong.
Amazon does something similar. They call it the two pizza rule.
I am not saying most companies shouldn’t have QA departments (it’s probably a good idea for the vast majority of them to be there). What I am saying is that until they start thinking about how to write software such that they aren’t needed in the first place, they are going to continue to build lousy software.
3. Too many ship their org charts.
I once worked at a start-up that had no less then six segmented, vertically sliced silos of teams each responsible for a different portion of their application. Six teams for one product.
Shipping your org chart is natural for most companies. It means you don’t have to coordinate and talk to others. You are the master of your own little silo. And your bonus certainly isn’t contingent on someone else meeting their goals.
Microsoft is currently falling prey to this. As Ray Ozzie recently pointed out in his farewell address to the company, Microsoft runs the risk of being left behind unless they can get their act together and start shipping integrated products beyond the PC. The have to stop shipping their org chart.
4. Most don’t see the value of software talent.
I know this sounds obvious but the quality of your product is directly proportional to the talent of the people you have building it. This cliche is compounded x10 when it comes to software.
Contrary to popular belief software is more then just typing.
You don’t have to explain this to companies like Microsoft, Google, and Facebook. They are currently locked in a waging war for talent. Anyone doubting the impact a single developer can have should ask Google where GMail, Googletalk, and Googlenews came from.
So that next time someone asks you how Google can organize the worlds data, and your company can’t seem to push a single release of their software live, check the size of your companies QA department, see if your company is shipping their org chart, and ask yourself if you truly live and die by the quality of your software.