Before Engineer Hiring, Consider the Approach of Reducing Work by Terminating Services and Features
“We want to hire engineers because we don’t have enough development resources.” Don’t you hear this often?
“We’re busy, so we just don’t have enough engineers…” As an engineer myself, I understand this well. When we’re busy, we tend to think “Maybe hiring a few engineers will solve it?”
However, I experienced something that made me think “Why not first review the work that’s keeping you busy?” So I decided to write this article.
What we often tend to do is complete the project by exceeding the development hours just because “it’s a request from management, so we can’t refuse.”
This is a poor decision because the Go decision was made based on the initially presented development hours, so if those hours are exceeded, you need to consult appropriately or the cost-effectiveness won’t match.
I think if it’s your own business development, you can get more flexible responses to the judgment that “if it takes that much development work, we don’t need to handle it.”
When faced with such a situation, there’s one action you can take quickly.
That is to identify services that require a lot of development and operational work from a technical perspective, propose them to people with business-side authority, and reduce the work to be done.
Based on that proposal, reasonable business-side people should be able to make appropriate decisions: “service termination,” “feature deletion,” or “continuation.”
If things move toward termination or reduction, you might find that the engineers you currently have can still do much more development, leading to the conclusion that you don’t need to hire engineers immediately.
This way, thinking with a balanced approach using the two axes of “engineer hiring” and “service/feature continuation” should broaden your range of options.
That’s all from the Gemba.