I usually will write something as a blog post first, but this started as a short LinkedIn post, which received two likes in less than 10 minutes after posting, so I decided to re-post it here.
Here are some thoughts fueled by listening to an enlightening podcast with a neuroscientist host (Andrew Huberman) and a choreographer guest (Twyla Tharp)🧠&🩰:
A fully supported software initiative includes people focused on coding, UI/UX, and testing. In high-performing teams, these specialists interact frequently.
Great solution teams understand that skilled “creatives” have deep grounding in data about human behavior and regularly test their work with users and refactor based on feedback and practicality 🎨 ; “testers” need to understand the limits of the technology, imagine behaviors that are not expected, and analyze the likelihood of something happening versus the impact of it happening 🧪 ; and developers who don’t test as they go, or don’t apply creative thinking to meeting business requirements may produce a lot of code but aren’t really productive 🤠 .
Yet, many organizations keep these experts apart outside of occasional “sync” meetings that don’t result in anything being synchronized but do tend to reduce productivity.
Other organizations recognize that there is overlap in thinking across these specialties and try to cut costs or speed output by removing the specialists and increasing the load of the remaining experts. 🪨
People that have chosen a focus and developed the skills to be good at what they do are happiest and most productive when they are supported and challenged by people with overlapping thought processes and differing skills. 👀 These similarities in thought processes and differences in discipline are the basis of highly productive teams that thrive when leadership aligns them on a shared direction. 🛣️
(Leaving out managers and architects is a peril, too, but including them here would require a much longer post).
© Scott S. Nelson