zlacker

[parent] [thread] 0 comments
1. Darman+(OP)[view] [source] 2025-12-06 03:34:13
I can write a similar article that: most people problems are technical problems.

This article hits on a pet peeve of mine.

Many companies and individuals can benefit from better processes, communication skills, and training.

And also people who proclaim "Most technical problems are people problems" and "It's not what you know, it's who you know" are disproportionately those who are attempting to influence others that "My skillset is more valuable than your skillset." The people who believe the opposite are heads-down building.

The truth is that nearly all problems are multifactorial and involve long chains of causality. They can be patched at multiple points.

And so while there are standard stories about "If you do the 5 Why's and trace back causality, the issue becomes a deeper human problem," you can nearly always do something else and find an alternative technical solution.

The standard story goes: "This thing failed because this this other thing crashed, because this thing was misconfigured, because the deployment script was run incorrectly, because no-one trained Bob how to use it." See, the human problem is the deepest one, right?

But you can find an alternate technical fix: why was it possible to run the deployment script incorrectly?

Or you can ping-pong it back into a technical problem: he wasn't trained because everyone is stressed with no time because things keep breaking because of bad architecture and no CI. So actually the technical problem is deepest.

But no, because that only happened because the CEO hired the wrong CTO because he didn't know anyone who could evaluate it properly....

...which only happened because they didn't use <startup that helps you evaluate engineers> (technical problem)

...which only happened because said startup didn't have good enough marketing (human problem)

...which only happened because they were too slow to build from their own tech debt and didn't have the money (technical problem...)

And so on. Ping, pong.

The article says: we had too much tech debt because humans weren't trained enough.

One can also say: we had too much tech debt because we didn't have good enough linters and clone detectors to keep out the common problems, and also we had made some poor technical choices that required hiring a much larger team to begin with.

If you have a pet problem, you can always convince yourself that it's responsible for all woes. That just keeps you from seeing the holistic view and finding the best solution.

[go to top]