[chiefalchemist]

> I think we need Big Teams for Small Stuff precisely _because_ of these 'modern development practices' that you mention.

Perhaps. But what I've also seen is the head count of a given project is a direct reflection of the intra-org status of the person heading the project.

There's a belief - that's a myth - that if 3 ppl is good the 6 is twice as good and time will be cut in half. I think we also know - with rare exception - that productivity slides as heads increase.

That's a given.

Then there's also a belief - again a myth - that some mod dev practices can fix the increased head count issue. It might mitigate it here and there. But MDP can only do so much to fix a dysfunctional org/group.

Ultimately it's a leadership/management issue. Process and technology are too often lipstick on a pig.

[pjc50]

> There's a belief - that's a myth - that if 3 ppl is good the 6 is twice as good and time will be cut in half. I think we also know - with rare exception - that productivity slides as heads increase.

This goes back to Brooks and has been true since longer than most of the programming industry has been alive. I do wonder why people are so resistant to learning from the past and just assuming "the way we do things now" must be an improvement.

[wehadfun]

> that if 3 ppl is good the 6 is twice as good

This 6 person development team is promoted by the Agile Industry. They say 6 people is a sweet spot, so that if someone goes on vacation then some other developer can "cover" them.

[chiefalchemist]

Yes. I should have said 6 and 12 or more. That said, it was only a quick refernce to the fact that productions drags as head count increases.