Results Are the Wrong Judge
We could be successful by chance.
We may be making wrong technology decisions that cost millions in losses while earning billions in revenue. And our technology decisions just seem right.
That is the trap. When the numbers are good, we assume the decisions behind them were good too. Results become the judge of everything.
But results are the wrong judge.
Strong results hide weak foundations
A billion-dollar company may be running on spreadsheets, data manipulation and macro gymnastics. And it may just be fine.
Revenue covers the inefficiency. Growth covers the workarounds. Nobody asks how the numbers were produced, because the numbers look good.
Good results make average acceptable
When results are rich and fulfilling, we can choose to get away with doing average jobs and building average structure in technology.
Shadow IT is acceptable too, as long as we appear to be moving fast.
PMOs and architecture can be ignored, as long as new systems can be funded.
None of this feels like a decision at the time. It feels like being practical. Why slow down for structure when the business is clearly doing well without it?
Progress on the surface, debt underneath
On the surface, it looks like progress and speed.
Underneath, technical debt is building on top of the business growth, and no one can see it.
It stays invisible because the growth is strong enough to carry it. The systems hold, the people work around the gaps, and the results keep coming. The debt does not disappear. It simply waits.
And it is rarely the growth years that send the bill. It is the years after.
Imagine the alternative
Just imagine what proper structure would offer your organisation while it is in its growth cycle.
Architecture, so that new systems fit together rather than pile up.
PMO, so that investment is directed rather than scattered.
Business analysis, so that what is built matches what the business actually needs.
Change management, so that people adopt the change rather than work around it.
Governance, so that decisions are made deliberately rather than by default.
Growth is when an organisation can most afford this. It is also when it feels least necessary.
The questions that remain
Here are some questions to ponder.
If your results dropped tomorrow, how much of your technology would you still be confident in?
Are your technology decisions sound, or are they simply being paid for by growth?
And if results are the only judge, who is judging the decisions?
