[Random_ernest]

For some years I was the developer you talk about, who always knew everything better, now I am a manager at a startup. So I was able to see both sides of the discussion.

I feel like it always comes down to a communication issue. Team members need to feel heard, and feel acknowledged that you fully understood what they are suggesting. On the other hand they need to understand that there are constraints that force a decision that might not technically be the best, but is pareto optimal. When this discussion occurs I sometimes bring up the analogy of these space movies where they put everything on a table that the astronauts have up there and try to make something out of it that mostly consists of duct-tape. Sure there are better tools, but the stuff on the table is all we have. Another thing that took me very long to understand as a developer is that innovation is a risk that might not always make sense economically. A thing that took me long to understand as a manager is that the happiness of your devs is one of your most precious resources that you have to manage well.

[rrradical]

A coworker introduced me to the concept of a 'novelty budget', and I find it really useful. If my team is taking on a new project, there are many ways to improve on how things have been done in the past. But doing anything new carries some risk. If every part of the project is new, it will be very risky.

So I use the idea of a novelty budget to negotiate with my engineers. "What things do you really want to change? Let's focus on that, and use tried and true, albeit suboptimal, methods for the other stuff, to stay within our novelty budget." Down the road, once you can handle more risk, you can introduce one of those changes that were originally punted.

[ChrisMarshallNY]

I like that!

"Novelty Budget"