Yes I agree, long term perspective is one which is definitely an important consideration, thanks for pointing it out. Though I would like to understand how the time frame would alter the thinking process or support the bias in question. Is it okay to have some biased thinking for long-term strategy?
Yeah, in some cases it slightly changes how much of the bias you want to resist. A few thoughts on a few biases you mentioned:
Social Proof
In your post, without saying it explicitly, it comes across as: "Everyone else is using it, that does not mean it's the right choice". In the context of long term organisational survival it is actually most often best to use something that is widely used, even if it's not the best.
Default Effect
This can actually be good. It's worse if you have to support 10 different stacks. We have the rule to keep about 2 stacks maximum. We only introduce a new one when we phased out the oldest version. On top of that it should be 'a lot' better than the current version to compensate for the training, learning curve and future migration.
Authority Bias
It's good to question why. However at some point you know all tools within the company are selected carefully and at that point it is ok go with the bias.
Availability Bias
Working with freelancers can positively influence this. While they might like to learn something new, it also comes at a cost.
Sunk cost fallacy
This is a tricky one. I am the first to say: "It does not matter we have invested a lot in this, it does not bring enough anymore". It's however very hard to find a balance, sometimes you keep old things because upgrading does not bring more than it costs.
Not-Invented-Here Syndrome
We have our own forms and routing library. Two examples where there are popular community versions. It's not bad to roll your own libraries, even if there are pretty good examples. I often encourage my developers to write their own code first before searching for a library, this ensures that they understand what they are looking for. People also tend to forget the cost of introducing an external library, if your site lives for 5 years, the thing you introduce needs to be maintained for 5 years as well. On top of that, some popular choices for common things are actually not as good as you might think.
In any case, I would say this would be a good process: hack something together to get an understanding of that you need, search for a library that is close to what you need, if you can't find a suitable library (where suitable includes long term thoughts) roll your own (preferably open source).
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Yes I agree, long term perspective is one which is definitely an important consideration, thanks for pointing it out. Though I would like to understand how the time frame would alter the thinking process or support the bias in question. Is it okay to have some biased thinking for long-term strategy?
Yeah, in some cases it slightly changes how much of the bias you want to resist. A few thoughts on a few biases you mentioned:
Social Proof
In your post, without saying it explicitly, it comes across as: "Everyone else is using it, that does not mean it's the right choice". In the context of long term organisational survival it is actually most often best to use something that is widely used, even if it's not the best.
Default Effect
This can actually be good. It's worse if you have to support 10 different stacks. We have the rule to keep about 2 stacks maximum. We only introduce a new one when we phased out the oldest version. On top of that it should be 'a lot' better than the current version to compensate for the training, learning curve and future migration.
Authority Bias
It's good to question why. However at some point you know all tools within the company are selected carefully and at that point it is ok go with the bias.
Availability Bias
Working with freelancers can positively influence this. While they might like to learn something new, it also comes at a cost.
Sunk cost fallacy
This is a tricky one. I am the first to say: "It does not matter we have invested a lot in this, it does not bring enough anymore". It's however very hard to find a balance, sometimes you keep old things because upgrading does not bring more than it costs.
Not-Invented-Here Syndrome
We have our own forms and routing library. Two examples where there are popular community versions. It's not bad to roll your own libraries, even if there are pretty good examples. I often encourage my developers to write their own code first before searching for a library, this ensures that they understand what they are looking for. People also tend to forget the cost of introducing an external library, if your site lives for 5 years, the thing you introduce needs to be maintained for 5 years as well. On top of that, some popular choices for common things are actually not as good as you might think.
In any case, I would say this would be a good process: hack something together to get an understanding of that you need, search for a library that is close to what you need, if you can't find a suitable library (where suitable includes long term thoughts) roll your own (preferably open source).