That's true. And each one of those teams is going to need intra-team support teams with a lot of enterprise project managers, product managers, technical project managers, stakeholders, directly responsible individuals. There's going to be schedules to manage, rollouts, release dates, code lockdowns. Build engineers, infrastructure to support the build engineers and the project managers. Engineers are going to be spending so much time in standups, meetings, pre-meeting meetups, all-hands, etc that they'll be lucky to get an unbroken hour a day to code at all. Before you know it you have 500 people doing a job that's entirely doable by a handful of hardworking people.
> Before you know it you have 500 people doing a job that's entirely doable by a handful of hardworking people
Perhaps the market rewards growth more than it does efficiency? I can't name a single company (post WhatsApp) that has users in the 9-plus-digit-range and has less than a thousand employees.
It seems like investors prefer to have a large (but still profitable) org with a lot of redundancy and clear systems in place than an elite team of superheroes
I'm just annoyed that Spez is running a bloated overweight organization, then using that fact to justify some user-hostile money grubbing
Nobody likes an elite team of superheroes for a _business_. Superheroes burn out, get hit by a bus, have limited affinity for creating good documentation, sometimes a tendency to be fascinated by shiny things, can get annoyed by a real or perceived <whatever> and quit or can be headhunted away. And then there goes your business.
I dislike unnecessary bloat, be it in software or in org design, as much as the next guy, but staking your company's long-term future on superheroes (or superpowers, as it's for some inexplicable reason still fashionable to say) is a recipe for disaster.
