To gauge if an engineering team can move faster, listen for specific 'smells.' Constant complaints about broken builds, flaky tests, overly long processes for provisioning environments, and high friction when switching projects are clear signals of significant, addressable bottlenecks.

Related Insights

Before investing in complex system instrumentation, use simple surveys to get a quick baseline of developer experience. Ask engineers to name their top three productivity blockers. This provides immediate, high-signal data to prioritize where to focus deeper data collection efforts.

CEO Dylan Field combats organizational slowness by interrogating project timelines. He seeks to understand the underlying assumptions and separate actual work from "well-intentionally added" padding. This forces teams to reason from first principles and justify the true time required, preventing unnecessary delays.

The most effective first step to improve developer experience (DevEx) is not building automation or buying tools. Instead, conduct a 'listening tour' with developers about their daily friction. This uncovers high-impact, low-lift opportunities that premature solutions often miss.

To avoid stifling teams with bureaucracy, leaders should provide slightly less structure than seems necessary. This approach, described as "give ground grudgingly," forces teams to think actively and prevents the feeling of "walking in the muck" that comes from excessive process. It's a sign of a healthy system when people feel they need a bit more structure, not less.

Engineering often defaults to a 'project mindset,' focusing on churning out features and measuring velocity. True alignment with product requires a 'product mindset,' which prioritizes understanding the customer and tracking the value being delivered, not just the output.

When a team presents a timeline that feels instinctively too long, trust that gut feeling. It likely signals an over-engineered solution. Complex systems never become simple; they only breed more complexity, causing timelines to expand endlessly. It's better to reset the team or the approach early on.

To move beyond static playbooks, treat your team's ways of working (e.g., meetings, frameworks) as a product. Define the problem they solve, for whom, and what success looks like. This approach allows for public reflection and iterative improvement based on whether the process is achieving its goal.

Instead of over-analyzing and philosophizing about process improvements, simply force the team to increase its cadence and ship faster. This discomfort forces quicker, more natural problem-solving, causing many underlying inefficiencies to self-correct without needing a formal change initiative.

Chess.com's goal of 1,000 experiments isn't about the number. It’s a forcing function to expose systemic blockers and drive conversations about what's truly needed to increase velocity, like no-code tools and empowering non-product teams to test ideas.

When pursuing a long-term strategic solution, dedicate product management time to high-level discovery and partner alignment first. This doesn't consume engineering resources, allowing the dev team to remain focused on mitigating the immediate, more visceral aspects of the problem.