[wink]

No need to sling terms like "you should grow up". There's both a reason a big share of developers hate JIRA with a passion and also a reason business people like it. It's hard to find the fine line of it being useful for both parties and not just making the developers' lives harder and I've seen people having to spend an extra 30min per day just fighting the tool. This is not about whining to keep your independece, this is mostly valid criticism that it creates work instead of making life easier.

[_rrnv]

Indeed I could have spared the terms, but your comment is exactly what I am talking about: developers often place themselves agains business people, sometimes feel superiority, and are proud of it. But in fact it's wrong and immature – working in a company means cooperation, and both departments have experts in different skills. Another common pattern is to glorify tools and frameworks and be passionate about them. Again, why? It's not like being a github issues fanatic and hateful of jira makes any significant difference in the end. You say devs spend extra 30min per day fighting jira. For one, if they are as smart as they say they are, maybe the problem is not jira but between the chair and the keyboard. For two, say devs don't spend that extra time on jira. Who do you think will have to spend extra time to collect all the info necessary for the company to know what's going on? Probably the business owner. But who cares, devs want it easy. I wish luck to those who are very smart, because they will always find good work. I have hopes for all the others that they won't end up just typing code, because in some years time they may be replaced overnight by AI.

[setr]

It's a matter of competing interests, and knowing your own domain best. Finance guys know finance best, devs know development best. Something (that looks) good financially might hurt development speed, iteration-time, bug-fixing, etc.

And it's not the CFO's job to know/understand these effects; its the CTO's job to. And it's the CTO's job to fight back on it if necessary, because its interfering with his domain. It's also the CTO's job to know whether or not its actually interfering with his domain, and its his job to argue that position. And ofc, its the CEO's job to look at both offers, and decide whether or not the cost of interference to development is worth the benefits to the financials. With perhaps the CFO/CTO coming to an agreement independent of the CEO where trivial, as an optimization, but the ultimate responsibility is on the CEO's hands.

It is absolutely not about simple cooperation: its competitive cooperation. The goal is shared, but the steps to achieve it are not. And because of specialization, we cannot cooperate by simply knowing the global state of things, and determining the best course of action. We can only know the parts we know (a subset of the global state), and optimize our local interest in hopes that our local optimizations will take use closer to the global optimization. And everyone is doing that, with a local view. The only person who truly intends to chase after the global optimization directly is the CEO.

You should be protecting your domain from competing interests, because everyone wants to have a say in your domain, whenever they can derive even minor benefits. They don't know the cost to your domain, or the benefits to it: they know the cost to their domain, and the benefits to their domain. They may have some idea of it, but ultimately its your own job to know your own domain, and defend it as necessary.

Development does not, and should not, know whats best for finance, and the same is true vice-versa. It's not their position to. They specialize in their own domains, and thats fine. Obviously an overly-aggressive defense, or interference, can be harmful, but it'd be ultimately stupid, and likely harmful, to blindly follow the orders of people who do not know your domain, in the spirit of cooperation.