Yeah, re-reading the article the designer doesn't sound blameless.
I'm probably willing to let my claim stand without anecdote (deviations from design occur outside the engineer's control), but honestly it's the weaker point, so let it drop. The more important one is that engineers design within a set of constraints, and if these parameters are exceeded, it is not the fault of the engineer.
The whole point of the article is that the vast majority of engineering teams have some power. It's not a license to derail the company with technical OCD, but as in all things… "balance, grasshopper."
If the product owner directs work at a ticket level and never assigns it to anyone, it's their fault it isn't there. If the engineers have more autonomy than I've seen at a company are were able to decide what to work on, then sure blame the engineers.
Regardless, there's this contentious relationship between decision makers and engineers because the former can't properly evaluate the work of the latter. Because of this, they either a) let bad engineers get away with stuff they shouldn't, or b) over-compensate and refuse to trust good engineers. It's a lose-lose.
reply