That's the job, it's a huge job taken a whole and to do that job, a variety of systems have arisen; object orientation, functional programming, agile process, etc, etc. All of these tools for helping to decrease complexity. And professions are generally studying at least some of these to "up their chops", so to speak.

The thing is, I think the GP was responding to the OP's headline "customers do not ask for software complexity". And the thing is, of course customers ask for a variety things that imply complexity. And, unlike what the OP's discussion, the particular soft approaches that been partly, however much, successful in preventing customer demands from spiraling into unmanageable complex have been ways of dealing with discreet, defined, parts of the development process. The problem with the OP, the article, is that it's a panacea, a vague and general call to make complexity unnecessary with either only a vague explanation of how to do this or an explanation hidden under several layers of rhetoric. "But designing simple software solutions is not simple and requires good principles along with solid experience." I could substitute "supply chains" or "aerospace solutions" and have something plausible sound though I know little about these. Which is to say I don't see OP offering things to make my job (or my former job) easier.