I understand what you mean, but it does match MBA/mckinsey thinking very closely.
Make a metric a goal, work tirelessly towards that new metric.
Does it make the product better? Well, the product is already made- so it doesn’t make a difference.
It’s only software developers who think a product is never “done”- normal MBA thinking is “we have invested in R&D, now there is a product, how do we get as many users of our product as possible”.
You don't think the reason we have seemingly broken optimization is because poorly thought out metrics are being gamed?
That's all its been for the last few decades. Everyone is now "data driven" and "metrics oriented". That's a footgun - if people can game it, they will, and numbers don't say what people think they say.
Whenever I see this much vehement agreement about something on HN, it sets off serious groupthink alarm bells.
Idk what the answer is, but it is not 100% this. It’s too simple and satisfying of an answer to be true.
I understand what you mean, but it does match MBA/mckinsey thinking very closely.
Make a metric a goal, work tirelessly towards that new metric.
Does it make the product better? Well, the product is already made- so it doesn’t make a difference.
It’s only software developers who think a product is never “done”- normal MBA thinking is “we have invested in R&D, now there is a product, how do we get as many users of our product as possible”.
You don't think the reason we have seemingly broken optimization is because poorly thought out metrics are being gamed?
That's all its been for the last few decades. Everyone is now "data driven" and "metrics oriented". That's a footgun - if people can game it, they will, and numbers don't say what people think they say.
Normally I would agree, but I've seen this happen too often. Common sense be damned, just make the number look good.