Avoiding the Band Aid Solution
We’ve all heard of the ‘band aid solution’ or the ‘workaround,’ in the context of a technology solution. And what’s the most common follow-up sentence? “Don’t worry, we’ll go back and fix it.”
But what happens if the team doesn’t go back?
Having consulted for dozens of different companies with different technology ecosystems, we’ve seen firsthand how building in ‘band aid approaches’ to the architecture and writing code to fill a gap only in the short-term can be incredibly detrimental to a business. Not only does this approach make your system architecture more difficult to sustain, but it also limits your ability to scale.
Stakeholders working for (or with) an organization that has created a band aid-based architecture may find themselves wishing that the whole system could be rebuilt from scratch. Unfortunately, that approach is much too costly to be considered feasible, and therefore companies continue to operate with inefficiencies, continuing to add short-term solutions over time. Let’s talk about some of the risks of scaling your business without considering the big picture architecture, and how to avoid that situation going forward.
What are the biggest risks of employing band aid solutions?
When system architecture is not well-designed and/or systems are not effectively integrated, there can be many negative consequences:
System users likely must access multiple systems or programs to perform a simple task
System developers probably struggle to update, enhance, and maintain the existing system(s)
Data likely is manually consolidated or aggregated
Onboarding and training new team members is likely more difficult
The vicious cycle of developing around and on top of old workarounds is likely to continue and worsen over time
While it’s clear that this short-term band aid development approach isn’t ideal, it’s still very common. Why? Because it can be harder to do things right, in a holistic and scalable manner, than to simply fix the challenge in front of us!
Why do companies find themselves with so many band aids?
No one sets out to build unsustainable, short-term system architecture. It’s probably safe to assume that most organizations recognize that it’s in their best interest to follow best practices, design a solution that’s foolproof, and implement a well-rounded system. But in reality, this doesn’t always happen.
Let’s explore some potential reasons for the prevalence of short-term fixes:
Moving fast takes priority above all else
The use case requires exceptions and customizations, and it’s faster and/or easier to hard code a few lines than re-design the solution
It can be easier to just add in multiple, disparate commercial-off-the-shelf tools to solve individual problems throughout the business
There’s a lack of in-house expertise for solution architecture or architecture planning
Employees are not incentivized to build something that works for the broader team or enterprise
What can be done about it?
At FlexPoint Consulting, we help our clients build sustainable, scalable technology footprints by prioritizing two key components: organizational culture and safeguards.
Fostering a Culture that Prioritizes Clean Coding
Leadership has an opportunity to promote the value of focusing on the big picture. Establishing and reinforcing a technology vision that promotes sustainability over temporary solutions can start at the top and should permeate the mindset of dev teams.
This requires strong coordination and collaboration with IT, including connecting the dots between business goals and technology enablement. In many cases, bold goals are infeasible without system support, and this is an opportunity to showcase IT’s contribution to the overall success of an enterprise.
In addition to the above, we recommend incorporating several of the below concepts to foster a culture of clean coding and long-term thinking.
Prioritize quality of development over speed, ensuring that solutions are built in consideration of upstream/downstream systems and processes, and that integrations are adequately tested
Get the requirements right the first time, and build for the exceptions, focusing on long-term solutions to necessary customizations versus short-term band aids
When considering third-party solutions and tools, consider how those tools:
Fit into the holistic picture of your overall system architecture (where you are now and where you plan to be)
Integrate with each other and/or existing tools in a strategic manner to avoid disparate systems or manual workarounds
Incentivize engineers to live the above values through consistent messaging from leadership and/or adjustments to performance review structure(s)
Building in Safeguards
Inevitably, there are going to be situations where a compromise or a sacrifice may be made to support the short-term at the expense of the long-term. Preparing the organization to address those situations in a planned, intentional manner is a great way to ensure that the solution architecture remains manageable and scalable.
Here are some ways we’ve succeeded in this over the years:
Ensure team members are held accountable to creating and executing mitigation plans for each band aid / workaround they develop
Increase cross-functional reviews of technology capabilities (as opposed to departments viewing their technology solutions in a silo), to promote enterprise-wide solutions
Hold tech debt clean-up sprints (incentivizing participation), and proactively weave the sprints into team roadmaps
Implement system design reviews with leadership at a set cadence
Here’s where we are now
Here’s where we’re trying to go
How do we get there in a smart and sustainable way
It’s worth the investment
While these practices and recommendations are very actionable, they first require a company to 1) recognize and acknowledge it has not properly prioritized its long-term solution architecture design, and 2) take the necessary steps to remediate.
Operating on top of a stable architectural foundation drives efficiency and ultimately growth, and the benefits of building, maintaining, and scaling a well-designed, holistic system architecture is very much worth the investment. Luckily, the above recommendations are simple and approachable for an organization that is prepared to make a change.
If you’re interested in a third-party assessment of your existing system architecture, or seeking change management expertise to help define and enforce new cultural values that embrace best practices, reach out to us at info@flexpointconsulting.com. We’d love to chat!