Most startup theory is ex-post, therefore bs

Re:Most startup theory is ex-post, therefore bs by ehnto on Tuesday August 20, 2019 @03:45PM (#20751170)

I started to see the same trend in technology hopping. New language's or frameworks are barely around long enough to develop long term maintainability best practices borne from experience, so everyone's blog posts are just well intentioned speculation.

You end up seeing enough contradicting information said absolutely that you realise no one is ever 100% right.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Most startup theory is ex-post, therefore bs by varjag on Tuesday August 20, 2019 @04:07PM (#20751479)

This extends to methodologies.

At this point am convinced that a competent team will complete the same project under formally waterfall, XP or Agile governance with only minor schedule differences.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Most startup theory is ex-post, therefore bs by zaind on Tuesday August 20, 2019 @04:58PM (#20752055)

I'm a huge fan of Alistair Cockburn's thinking on this point. He argues that people - and their characteristics - are a far greater driver of project success than methodology.

The argument is not a formal one, but I think still holds a lot of weight:

https://ameyakarve.wordpress.com/2012/07/22/characterizing-p...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Most startup theory is ex-post, therefore bs by owens99 on Tuesday August 20, 2019 @05:15PM (#20752242)

I agree with this for the most part, though there are many false positives of “great teams” on paper who screw it all up purely because of a backwards methodology.

Methodology and people are not mutually exclusive. And it’s a lot harder to swap in and out people (though it may be necessary).

[ Parent | on HN ]