Join devRant
Do all the things like
++ or -- rants, post your own rants, comment on others' rants and build your customized dev avatar
Sign Up
Pipeless API
From the creators of devRant, Pipeless lets you power real-time personalized recommendations and activity feeds using a simple API
Learn More
Search - "design by committee"
-
Had a conference call for a fairly large internal project today. Everyone involved was there. Turns out the other subteams had done jack shit. Blablabla drafts and concepts bla, yeah right.
Then someone had the idea we needed an e-mail distribution list. But what's it gonna be called?
Suddenly *everyone* had an opinion and wanted their name used. And, in true "design by committee" fashion, everyone's ideas got merged.
Our list's name is now 30. fucking. characters. long. FUCK. you.
Luckily, I can leave the project this month. Can't wait... -
SPDX. Actually a cool idea, you slap one line of comment in your source files that gives the licence. Easy to understand at a glance, and grep friendly. Also no more "huh what exactly does this licence here say, is that MIT, BSD with or without shit or what".
But once you have something simple, you can bet some design committee tries to "improve" it and cover everything imaginable.
The result looks like this (see also screenshot): https://wiki.spdx.org/view/...
Holy shit. What was that about? Simplifying crap? Yeah sure that's totally what it looks like.3 -
A tale of silos, pivots, and mismanagement.
Background: Our consultancy has been working with this client for over a year now. It started with some of our back-end devs working on the API.
We are in Canada. The client is located in the US. There are two other teams in Canada. The client has an overseas company contracted to do the front-end of the app. And at the time we started, there was a 'UX consultancy' also in the US.
I joined the project several months in to replace the then-defunct UX company. I was the only UX consultant on the project at that time. I was also to build out a functional front-end 'prototype' (Vue/Scss) ahead of the other teams so that we could begin tying the fractured arms of the product together.
At this point there was a partial spec for the back-end, a somewhat architected API, a loose idea of a basic front-end, and a smattering of ideas, concepts, sketches, and horrific wireframes scattered about various places online.
At this point we had:
One back-end
One front-end
One functional prototype
One back-end Jira board
One front-end Jira board
No task-management for UX
You might get where this is going...
None of the teams had shared meetings. None of the team leads spoke to each other. Each team had their own terms, their own trajectory, and their own goals.
Just as our team started pushing for more alignment, and we began having shared meetings, the client decided to pivot the product in another direction.
Now we had:
One back-end
One original front-end
One first-pivot front-end
Two functional prototypes
One front-end Jira board
One back-end Jira board
No worries. We're professionals. We do this all the time. We rolled with it and we shifted focus to a new direction, with the same goals in mind internally to keep things aligned and moving along.
Slowly, the client hired managers to start leading everything in the same direction. Things started to look up. The back-end team and the product and UX teams started aligning goals and working toward the same objectives.
Then the client shifted directions again. This time bigger. More 'verticals'. I was to leave the previous 'prototypes' behind, and feature-freeze them to work on the new direction.
One back-end
One conceptual 'new' back-end
One original front-end
One first-pivot front-end
One 'all verticals' front-end
One functional prototype
One back-end Jira board
One front-end Jira board
One product Jira board
One UX Jira board
Meanwhile, the back-end team, the front-end team overseas, all kept moving in the previously agreed-upon direction.
At this stage, probably 6 months in, the 'prototypes' were much less proper 'prototypes' but actually just full apps (with a stubbed back-end since I was never given permission or support to access the actual back-end).
The state of things today:
Back to one back-end
One original front-end
One first-pivot front-end
One 'all verticals' front-end
One 'working' front-end
One 'QA' front-end
One 'demo' front-end
One functional prototype
One back-end Jira board
Two front-end Jira boards
One current product Jira board
One future product Jira board
One current UX Jira board
One future UX Jira board
One QA Jira board
I report to approximately 4 people remotely (depending on the task or the week).
There are three representatives from 'product' who dictate features and priorities (they often do not align).
I still maintain the 'prototype' to this day. The front-end team does not have access to the code of this 'prototype' (the clients' request). The client's QA team does not test against the 'prototype'.
The demos of the front-end version of the product include peanut-gallery design-by-committee 'bug call-outs', feature requests, and scope creep by attendees in the dozens from all manner of teams and directors.4 -
Web site has taken so long to build due to content delays. When the site is in partial preview- the managers involved forget the direction we were taking content and tear it apart again- demanding new content.
Square one never felt so familiar.