• ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    5 months ago

    Software just has to be good enough that people put up with it. Once you get users on the system, you make it difficult to move your data out which acts as a lock in mechanism. The company that can make a minimally usable product that people are willing to put up with will typically beat one making a really good product that takes longer to get to market.

    • ___@l.djw.li
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      5 months ago

      To wit, WorkDay is universally regarded as trash. But companies keep writing checks, so employees on both sides of the time clock have to keep tolerating it

        • ___@l.djw.li
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          As long as the reports that the C-suite gets look pretty, that’s all that matters. Have seen that one from both sides.

          “I need five developer hours to implement a UI for this manual process that is time sensitive and exposes us to significant risk if we screw it up. Oh, and I’m the only one who knows how to do it in prod, so we have a bus problem.”

          “Nah, I want reports…. Wait, why did we write an HO4 policy in Corpus Christie, AFTER the hurricane warning was issued?”

          “See above, and prioritise things that matter.”

        • adhocfungus
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          This is what I’ve seen too. Directors come back from a conference and suddenly we’re learning a newer but objectively worse system. Obviously the grunts using the systems aren’t consulted, but are expected to be team players through this educational experience.