Similarly, when developers declare how much better one framework is than another after a complete rewrite. Failing to acknowledge that many of the benefits came from the rewrite, not the framework.
That’s a great point. I wish I’d mentioned that in the post.
You go into a rewrite with all this accumulated domain knowledge that you probably didn’t have the first time around, and a much clearer understanding of the problem.
But then people act like “Man, Angular is so awesome!”
Apparently I’m not. I really hate these titles.
But fort he point the author is making, one can see this style of thinking all over the place. I have worked at companies that did reorgs all the time, as if reorging will some how fix a culture of poor quality. I’m not sure if people honestly think that their issue is how the organisation is structured or don’t know how to change culture in an organisation. One nice thing about reorging is that generally the person doing the reorging is not being moved around either, which implies they don’t see themselves as part of the problem. On the other hand, admitting there is a culture problem means you are part of the problem.
I know, the title sucks. Sorry about that.
It’s hard to find a balance sometimes between boring, matter-of-fact titles that nobody clicks on and this sort of Buzzfeed-style clickbait thing.
But I take your criticism to heart, and I’ll try to lean to the conservative side next time.
I recently left a company that has had reorgs roughly every 6 months for years now. It’s like tradition. Really what happens is that someone new comes in and shits all over the current state, insisting they get their own way. Over and over.
Sometimes there isn’t even a real problem other than ego.
This is why I’m inherently distrustful of large orgs: they spawn all sorts of ridiculous behavior that makes zero sense with regard to what they actually do in the real world. And it always traces back to someone trying to protect turf or enlarge their ego.
How utterly dull and uninspiring.