Cool for cool's sake is not enough I recently had the honour to participate in a fast-track innovation management course from a prestigious university. This course included many topics: portfolio management, innovation strategy and human factors for innovation, among others. A strong theme throughout the course was to listen to the most important stakeholder: the paying customer. There is much wisdom in this statement when addressed to engineers. Being an engineer by education, I can tell you that engineers see their projects as a craft they take pride in - not a money maker. Consequently, new features are prioritized on the basis of a "cool" factor. The end result of this philosophy is over-engineering, where teams spend lots of energy and time on solving the wrong problems in a wrong way. Think for example a slightly faster train which costs 10 times the expected cost and consumes more power. The technology involved might be breathtaking and involve new materials, propu...
In the mind of an engineer In the technology world that I live and breathe there is the strong belief that an optimal solution will always be chosen if it is possible. In most problems there is some sort of trade-off that has to be done. But if through analysis it is concluded that one of the solutions is actually better in all respects, then it follows to reason that this should be followed. My argument to you is that this is not the case. Optimal solutions are not always preferred. The illusion of meritocracy But wait a second - doesn't basic economic theory tells us that decisions are made in terms of risk vs reward? In other words, prudent people always compare expected profits versus expected risks and if the outcome is positive, they go ahead. Well, first of all, people are not (always) prudent. But second of all, this model also assumes people make decisions independent of each other. Actual reality is much messier. Tradition affects our judgement and hierarchy warps our wor...