Organizations sometimes face the challenge of maintaining software used for the tactical day to day operations while at the same time they are trying to create new software that will strategically help the business. When using the same team to do both tactical and strategic development the chances of the strategic development actually being any good are slim. If time and budget are not a factor then the strategic development will have a chance of success but will be extremely late and over budget.
The crux of the problem is that the context switching between tactical and strategic will blow timelines and budgets, along with limiting the effectiveness of the team in creating something that is actually good. When the tactical work takes longer, which it always does, then there will be less time for implementing the strategic ideas. Limiting the time needed to create the strategic software will result in the cutting of corners, shoddy work, and software that is just not well thought out and easy to use.
To be strategic, tech teams need time to think of the bigger picture. It’s extremely difficult for them to create something good because they are always in the weeds. When you add the need for them to think tactically and strategically at the same time then they are required to be in the weeds in multiple gardens.
Understandably, some organizations won’t have the resources to spin up a brand new isolated team to work in a vacuum on the strategic software. For these folks there should be at least a single high level technical / business person working on the new software all the time. This person should not be involved with any day to day tactical, ever, and should be considered to have gone rogue. A conversation here and there to get advice on tactical projects will work, as long as they are scheduled ahead of time. This single person should never implement anything tactical unless it has to do with laying ground work for the strategic software.
For organizations that actually have the resources to spin up a new time then go “dark”. Start the new team, put them in a vacuum, take them off the grid, go rogue. Whatever you want to call it, treat the strategic software like you would treat a startup, following all the normal agile, MVP, fail fast principles that you read about.
Over the years I’ve witnessed some failures. In some cases not matter how apparent it is made that the strategic software will not be completed unless the team goes “dark” the organization can never get out of it’s own way and let the thinkers think. In the end most organization will spend an inordinate amount of time and money for nothing, failed projects are the norm. The kicker is that sometimes the “tactical” software is never even used because the organization is going so fast and is so immersed with putting out fires that they aren’t able to think through what they are actually asking for. This is why the tactical software takes longer, this is why strategic software is treated like a second class citizen.
I have also witnessed some successes. Where a single team is left alone to do what they need to in order to create something great. When a team has the organizational backing to just create something great and the time to spend thinking about what needs to be done then lightning will strike. The team will be a well oiled machine, the software will meet or exceed expectations, and the strategic business goals will be met. By going “dark” them team can actually see and build the vision of the organization.
I recently spoke with a friend of mine that worked at Comcast. I was sharing with them how much I liked and admired what Comcast has done with the X1 platform. He told me that in order to accomplish their goal of reinventing the platform they had to spin up a separate team and treat it as a startup.
When you step back and compare the failures and successes you will see some things that you wouldn’t expect. The cost of spinning up a new team and actually meeting the strategic business goals will be less expensive and more successful than trying to have a single team juggle all the balls. When you look at only staff dollars for the single team, the cost will appear cheaper on paper.
It would take many successes and failure for an organization to see the benefits of going dark, some stumble upon it by accident, and some are advised to just do it.