| The problems with this hierarchy are: In the worst case scenario, a bad design or implementation can be the equivalent of multiplying all effort by zero. - It can cause you to be unable to demo a product to a customer, or offer them the product as a trial period, because the product simply doesn't work or is unusable. - A bad implementation can make you waste all your funding in something you cannot monetize and leaving you without an exit strategy. - A bad implementation can violate regulations and be effectively illegal. - A bad implementation can make you lose clients and affect your company reputation, sometimes permanently. Even if you hire an army of customer support representatives to contain frustration, or offer refunds, gifts and discounts, the bleeding won't stop until you fix the implementation. - A bad implementation can make it necessary to hire an army of engineers to implement a simple change, because all your engineers spend 99% of their time trying to keep the Jenga tower of spaghetti code they can't refactor running. They cannot refactor it because you told them that "how" is not important. - A bad implementation and bad practices can frustrate your engineers and cause them to actually leave their job. So, implementation is not only some abstract nerd problem about spaces vs tabs, it can be an HR problem, a financial problem, a reputation problem, a legal problem, etc. |
It sounds like "how you build it" is very important to you, which (as I read the article, and in my own opinion) is a perfectly acceptable value. That's the point of value systems, you don't have to agree about them but if there is a conflict between your values and values of your organisation, be aware of it because otherwise it will eventually cause conflicts.